TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 549X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parable sales effected by the same supplier to other importers in India - no evidence of the relationship having impacted the conditions of sale or that the relationship itself had been suppressed to mislead the assessing authority. There is no evidence of any comparable sales effected by the same supplier to other importers in India. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Custom Appeal No. 176 of 2012 - A/86581/2019 - Dated:- 11-9-2019 - Hon ble Mr C J Mathew, Member (Technical) And Hon ble Ajay Sharma, Member (Judicial) Shri Shankar Bala, CA for the appellant Shri Dharmendar Singh, Supdt (AR) for the respondent ORDER PER: C J MATHEW ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ese enumerated circumstances alone that the declared value would be rejected under law. It is his further contention that Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988, and the successor Rules, 2007, does require recourse to rule 7 therein for determination of assessable value of goods supplied by a related person within the meaning of section 14 of Customs Act, 1962 whereas the adjudicating authority has erroneously invoked rule 9 of the said Rules. Moreover, he submits that patently unfounded allegations of non-declaration of relationship with supplier and of inordinate markup of retail price with intent to enrich the parent company appear to have formed the basis for the detriment to them in the impugned order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. We find no evidence of the relationship having impacted the conditions of sale or that the relationship itself had been suppressed to mislead the assessing authority. There is no evidence of any comparable sales effected by the same supplier to other importers in India. On the contrary, we observe a patent contradiction in the impugned order; while one of the grounds for re-determination is that a direct sale by the overseas supplier was made at higher prices, the recourse to rule 9 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988, and the successor Rules, 2007, proceeded on the finding of lack of such comparable prices. 7. The appellant is in the business of maintenance and overhauli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
