TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 726X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance of the said reassessment in writing. In the present case, the proper officer doubted the truth or accuracy of the value declared by the importers for the reason that contemporaneous data had a significantly higher value. It was open to the importers to require the proper officer to intimate the grounds in writing for doubting the truth or accuracy of the value declared by them and seek a reasonable opportunity of being heard, but they did not do so - It needs to be noted that section 124 of the Customs Act provides for issuance of a show cause notice and personal hearing, and section 17(5) of the Customs Act requires a speaking order to be passed on the Bills of Entry, except in a case where the importers/exporters confirm the acceptance in writing. It is no doubt true that the value of the imported goods shall be the transaction value of such goods when the buyer and the seller of goods are not related and the price is the sole consideration, but this is subject to such conditions as may be specified in the Rules to be made in this behalf. The Valuation Rules have been framed - The very fact that the importers had agreed for enhancement of the declared value in the lett ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ically stating that it agreed for enhancement of the value of goods to USD 1.94 per kg and that it did not desire that a show cause notice should be issued to it or personal hearing be provided to it, which requirements are set out in section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 the Customs Act . It also stated that it did not desire that a speaking order, as contemplated under section 17(5) of the Customs Act, should be passed on the Bills of Entry. In view of the specific requests made in the letters that were submitted by the appellant in regard to all the Bills of Entry that it had agreed for the declared value of the goods to be enhanced, the assessing officer assessed the value of the goods at the enhanced rate. It is after the payment of duty on the aforesaid assessments made by the assessing officer and after the out of charge date that the appellant filed four appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals), which appeals were ultimately dismissed by a common order dated 02.06.2020. 4. Notice of this appeal was sent to the appellant and the learned counsel for the appellant by speed post informing that the appeal would be listed for final hearing on 04.05.2023. Office has reported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further information, or in the absence of a response of such importer, the proper officer still has reasonable doubt about the truth or accuracy of the value so declared, it shall be deemed that the transaction value of such imported goods cannot be determined under the provisions of sub-rule(1) of rule 3. (2) At the request of an importer, the proper officer, shall intimate the importer in writing the grounds for doubting the truth or accuracy of the value declared in relation to goods imported by such importer and provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard, before taking a final decision under sub-rule (1). Explanation.-(1) For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that:- (i) This rule by itself does not provide a method for determination of value, it provides a mechanism and procedure for rejection of declared value in cases where there is reasonable doubt that the declared value does not represent the transaction value; where the declared value is rejected, the value shall be determined by proceeding sequentially in accordance with rules 4 to 9. (ii) The declared value shall be accepted where the proper officer is satisfied about the truth an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the self-assessment of goods referred to in sub-section (1) and for this purpose, examine or test any imported goods or export goods or such part thereof as may be necessary. Provided that the selection of cases for verification shall primarily be on the basis of risk evaluation through appropriate selection criteria. (3) For the purposes of verification under sub- section (2), the proper officer may require the importer, exporter or any other person to produce any document or information, whereby the duty leviable on the imported goods or export goods, as the case may be, can be ascertained and thereupon, the importer, exporter or such other person shall produce such document or furnish such information. (4) Where it is found on verification, examination or testing of the goods or otherwise that the self- assessment is not done correctly, the proper officer may, without prejudice to any other action which may be taken under this Act, re-assess the duty leviable on such goods. (5) Where any re-assessment done under sub- section (4) is contrary to the self-assessment done by the importer or exporter and in cases other than those where the importer or expor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ite declaring such value voluntarily during assessment after going through contemporaneous import data and agreeing that declared value is liable to rejection. The grounds of appeal are the same on which the Appellant had agreed during assessment. The Appellant cannot challenge assessment on the same grounds which were agreed to during assessment. In this regard I rely upon Hon'ble Tribunal's judgment in case of M/s Jai Shiv Trading Co. [2018(359)ELT 0208(T-Del.)]. The same principle was followed in case of M/s Sodagar Knitwear [2018(362) ELT 819(TDel)] which has been upheld by Hon'ble Apex Court in 2018(362) ELT A213 (SC). 5.5 It is evident that in this case, when the Appellant was asked to justify the declared value, they themselves agreed that their declared value was liable to rejection and hence voluntarily declared higher value. Thus this case stands at different footing as compared to various case laws cited by the Appellant in as much as the referred case laws relate to enhancement of value by the assessing officer which is not the situation in present appeal. Thus the case laws and various orders cited by the Appellant are not relevant to present appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubt the truth or accuracy of the value of the imported goods, he may ask the importer to furnish further information. Rule 12(2) stipulates that it is only if an importer makes a request that the proper officer shall, before taking a final decision, intimate the importer in writing the grounds for doubting the truth or accuracy of the value declared and provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard. To remove all doubts, Explanation 1(iii)(a) provides that the proper officer can have doubts regarding the truth or accuracy of the declared value if the goods of a comparable nature were assessed at a significantly higher value at about the same time. 16. Explanation (1)(i) to rule 12 of the Valuation Rules, however, provides that the rule only provides a mechanism and procedure for rejection of declared value and does not provide a method for determination of value and if the declared value is rejected, the value has to be determined by proceeding sequentially in accordance with rules 4 to 9. 17. The very fact that the importers had agreed for enhancement of the declared value in the letters submitted by them to the assessing authority, itself implies that the importers had no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
