9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 686X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ill of Entry No. 7080250 dated 14.10.2016 under EDI at ICD, Tuglakabad, New Delhi and declared various items such as Baby Caps, Cloth Gloves, Baby Bootie, Baby Tights and Baby tops. When the goods were examined on 2nd check basis, certain discrepancies were noticed in respect of the total quantities on some of the declared goods. Further, certain extra items were also found during examination including adult jacket of 'Versace' brand. The Customs Authorities investigated the charges of mis- declaration as well as undervaluation of the impugned goods and recorded the statement of Sh. Eklovey Chug, Manager of the assessee firm, in which he admitted that certain goods of the nature of adult jacket of 'Versace' brand and children &n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the Order-in-Original merits to be upheld since the importer had admitted the mis-declaration as well as re- determination of value on record. They also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner vs. Jai Shiv Trading Company vide order dated 20.07.2017. 4. With the above background, we heard Sh. R. K. Manjhi, ld. AR for the Revenue as well as Sh. Arijit Dikshit, ld. Advocate for the assessee. 5. Heard both sides and perused record. 6. The respondent-assessee filed Bill of Entry for import of certain goods and when the consignment was examined it was noticed that the quantities of goods imported did not tally with that declared in the Bill of Entry. It was noticed that a few extra items were also found, the det ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion value stands rejected and the value of the goods have been re-determined as per Rule 7 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. It is noteworthy that the representative of the importer has been specifically shown the basis for re-determination of the value and his statement recorded by the Customs Officers. It is on record that Sh. Eklovey Chug, Manager of the importer has specifically admitted in his statement dated 31.12.2016 that he agreed with the manner of calculating the assessable value and differential duty. 9. It is settled position of law that the facts which are admitted need not be proved. In the case of CCE, Madras vs. Systems & Components Pvt. Ltd. -2004 (165) ELT 136 (SC), the Hon'ble Apex Court in para 5 of the order has o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
