TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 721X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and now before us, bears no evidence of such procedural or substantive compliance. Nor is there anything on record to instill confidence in us that such finalization has not been undertaken in the inter regnum with no possibility of our jurisdiction being invoked against those determinations, if any, of differential duty. We are not confronted with determination of differential duty to be recovered in the consignments covered by the three bills of entry. That is yet to be undertaken or, if it has been, would be at some stage in the appellate hierarchy - In the absence of re-assessed bills of entry, we have before us, at best, a piece-meal determination which, being premature, would be inappropriate to dispose off. Order set aside - M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te, that the supplier and the appellant are not related persons, and that no consideration other that the transfer price reflected in the declaration had been remitted, directly or indirectly, to the supplier were ignored. 2. We have heard Learned Counsel for appellant and Learned Authorized Representative at length. According to Learned Counsel, the appellant and supplier are not related and the computation of transfer price, submitted to the lower authorities, evidences the absence of additional consideration to the supplier. It is also submitted that reliance on margin of profit based on local market price is contrary to the prescriptions in Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988 and that there has be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... crutiny was undertaken for the brands in this dispute leading to the order that was carried in appeal to Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) and the outcome of which was not pleasing to the appellant. 5. The loading of value that is impugned before us is intended to be in force for three years before being subjected to review unless fresh circumstances warrant re-determination earlier. Though the order of loading did, on submission of the appellant herein, take note of bills of entries no. 740879/28.04.2007, 733735/23.04.2006 and 757000/15.05.2007, re-determination of assessment for differential duty of any, or all, of them is not on record. Furthermore, we find that the loading has been applied uniformly without reference either to the ba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... propriate duty, including on account of undervaluation, the proper officer takes recourse to section 28 of Customs Act, 1962. The benchmark for ascertainment of assessment is the rate of duty in section 12 of Customs Act, 1962 and, to the extent of ad valorem rate, to be governed by the valuation scheme of section 14 of Customs Act, 1962. It is the assessment taken under section 17, section 18 or section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 that are decisions within the meaning of section 128 of Customs Act, 1962. The loading order intended for such assessment or determination by proper officer under the provisions enumerated supra is not a final decision but, as ordained therein, to be subject to several circumstances. In any case, the conseque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
