9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 921X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that, on 30.01.2020 the application filed by the appellant for early hearing as well as miscellaneous application for stay came up for hearing. The Tribunal allowed the EH application and for this reason, the appellant submitted that he is not pressing the application for stay of recovery of demand. The stay application was thus dismissed as infructuous. 3. Ld. Counsel submitted that the appellant had imported certain goods and the foreign supplier being related company, the correctness of the declared value was examined by the Special Valuation Branch (SVB). After considering the relevant facts and evidence, the Assistant Commissioner as per O-I-O dated 04.06.2008 held that the price declared was on par with contemporaneous imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt of Rs. 98.16 lakhs and Rs. 136 lakhs which was paid to the foreign supplier as seen from the balance sheet for the years 2011-12 and 2012-13 was not includible in the declared value. Further an amount of Rs. 26 lakhs paid to the group company for the insurance of expat employees was also held to be not includible. Further, he ordered for inclusion of Rs. 8 lakhs which was paid towards freight forwarding. The order was passed by the Deputy Commissioner accordingly. 8. The Commissioner of Customs aggrieved by such order passed by the Deputy Commissioner filed an appeal and the Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the order and directed the adjudicating authority to revisit the issue and pass orders. He also ordered to collect EDD @ 5% of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. He therefore submitted that the stay application requires to be restored. 11. Ld. A.R Shri Vikas Jhajharia strongly opposed the application. He submitted that the appellant has already given up his right for obtaining stay by not pressing the stay application. He cannot further urge for relief claimed in this application. 12. Heard both sides. 13. Ld. Counsel submits that valuation of the goods as done by the SVB should be stayed during pendency of the appeal. On the early date of hearing, Ld. Counsel had submitted that he does not wish to proceed with stay application as the early hearing of the appeal had been allowed. Thus the stay requested for in the present application is not from recovery of the demand but for stay of valuation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
