9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty of Rs. 2.50 lakhs under Section 112(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the appellants. The impugned order has also demanded differential duty of Rs. 5,84,150/- together with interest. 2. The case relates to the import of semi-conductors by the appellants vide Bill of Entry No. 140283 dated 8-8-2000. The allegation is that the impugned goods have been grossly under valued. A show cause notice dated 31-1-01 was issued to the appellants, amongst others, in which they were called upon to show cause as to why differential duty should not be demanded. One of the grounds was that the appellants had failed to produce the manufacturer's invoice and certain contemporaneous prices were relied upon from the semi-conductors division of M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s namely, being relation between the parties etc. the burden is on the Department to prove undervaluation, if any; (v) Reliance placed by the Department on the local selling prices obtained from the semi-conductor division of M/s. Philips India Ltd. cannot be used to load the invoice value and that copies of these letters, which M/s. Phillips India Ltd. had addressed to the Department, though relied upon in the Notice, were not supplied to them, which clearly amounts to the violation of the principles of natural justice; (vi) In the light of the above, the declared value may be accepted and the impugned order passed by the Commissioner be set aside. 6. The ld. S.D.R., on the other hand, contended that the prices have been undervalued by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had been shown two letters dated 4-12-2000 and 20-12-2000 from M/s. Phillips India Ltd. stating the lowest prices of Phillips semi-conductors of the same description as shown in his Bill of Entry No. 140283 dated 8-8-2000 and that he understands from the said letters that the prices shown in the letters are the lowest prices offered (FOB) of semi-conductors of Philippines origin which are same as the semi-conductors under seizure; that the declared prices of the goods imported by him vide Bill of Entry No. 140283 dated .8-8-2000 and seized under Panchanama dated 26-9-2000 were not the correct price; that the prices shown in the letters from M/s. Phillips India Ltd. were the correct FOB prices; that the correct FOB value of the semi-conduct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntry of origin (i.e. Philippines) from M/s. Phillips India Ltd. Therefore, the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of M/s. Eicher Tractors supra is not applicable to the facts of the present case. The appellants' contention that there is violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as the copies of the letters of M/s. Phillips India Ltd. have not been supplied to them is not borne out from the records. It is seen that the copies of the letter dated 4-12-2000 and 20-12-2000 received from M/s. Phillips (India) Ltd. were handed over to the proprietor of the appellants on 31-1-2001, when he had acknowledged the receipt of the show cause notice along with the relied upon documents, which contained the said letters from M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
