TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 712X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Customs Act and the Valuation Rules and also by not adopting the sequential application thereof the market survey was conducted for the price of the goods under assessment without exhausting the various other alternatives. The transaction value is proposed to be rejected under Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation Rules, and therefore, the Adjudicating Authority has to follow the procedure as prescribed under various Rules starting from Rule 3, 4, 5 and only thereafter to resort to Rule 7 of the Customs Valuation Rules. This is incorrect and illegal. The market survey is, therefore, not sustainable - Further the market inquiry report regarding the price of imported goods has not been provided to the appellant and also there is no ment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Conditioner (Brass), Hand valve welding for filing gas in Air conditioner, Empty bottle Sprayer (mark- A VCO) and Ceramic coffee mug etc. Acting on the basis of intelligence input provided by DRI, Headquarter, regarding under valuation of imported goods by the appellant, the container containing imported goods was examined by the officers of the Customs, ICD (Import), TKD on 31/03/2018. After examination, it was prima facie found by the Customs Officer, that the appellant has undervalued the imported consignments and also mis-declared the description of a few items including the weight of ceramic cups. Accordingly, the Customs authority detained and seized the goods vide seizure memo dated 27/04/2018. After the investigation, it was fou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hall not challenged the identity of the provisional released goods. 3. Being aggrieved of the aforesaid order of provisional release and the onerous condition imposed, the present appeal has been filed on the following grounds; (i) The provisional release order has been passed in violation of Principle of Natural Justice as the adjudicating Authority has not followed the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value Imported Goods Rules, 2007) to the extent that the sequential application thereof has not been adopted by the Adjudicating Authority and the market inquiry was resorted to under Rule 9 of CVR, without exhausting the rules as provisions of Rule 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 which is residual method. (ii) The items, which have been imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by day. (vii) Learned Counsel for the appellant also submitted that in above submission of the appellant were also argued before Learned Commissioner (Appeals), but he has brushed them aside in the impugned order. The order is passed without going into the merits of the case and the finding of the lower Adjudicating Authority was confirmed in a routine manner. The impugned order suffers from inherent deficiency on account of the fact that the Commissioner (Appeal) has not dealt with the various case laws cited by the appellant regarding the various conditions imposed by the Adjudicating Authority for the release of seized goods. It was argued that the Adjudicating Authority has not given any cogent reason for the rejection of the transac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me has been followed in this case. Therefore, he argues that the impugned order is correct and legal, and therefore, require to be upheld in this appeal proceedings. 6. We have heard the learned Advocate, on behalf of the appellant and learned DR for the Revenue. 7. The issue involved in this case is regarding the provisional release of the seized goods for the imports made by the Appellant. The appellant has imported the consignment of mixed article as discussed earlier and filed the Bill of Entry for the clearance thereof after payment of assessed duty. However, the same was reported to be undervalued as per the DRI and, accordingly, the same proposed to be rejected. We find that the Adjudicating Authority has not followed the conte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l release of the seized goods. In this case the Adjudicating Authority has not given any cogent reason for having increased the price declared by the appellant exorbitantly nearly six times of the declared price. Therefore, we find that the impugned order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) illegal and perverse and in complete violation of the provisions of Customs Acts, Rules and regulations made thereunder. 9. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and order the provisional release of the seized goods on the execution of bond to the extent of value proposed by the Department but with bank guarantee to the extent of 25 % declared value of the consignment by the appellant. 10. As the imported goods are lying for the Customs cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
