TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 1193X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had accepted the value declared for the car, being a second-hand car and not a popular branded car. The declared value of the air conditioner compressors was rejected and re-determined as USD 300 (C F). Though the Department has not filed any appeal against such order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has, without giving any notice to the appellant, enhanced the value of the car so as to demand differential duty. In the absence of an appeal filed by the Department, the Commissioner (Appeals) ought not to have interfered with the findings with regard to the valuation - the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) revising the value of the car requires to be set aside. The Commissioner (Appeals) has reduced the penalty to Rs.25,000/- - the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, it was found that the value worked out to only USD 310 more that the declared value. 3. The original authority accepted the declared value of the car, rejected the value of the split air conditioner compressors and re-determined the same. It was held that the import of used or second-hand vehicles is subject to conditions laid down under Licensing Note No. 1 of Chapter 87 of ITC (HS) Classifications of Import Export Items 2004-2009 and the car had not been registered for use in any country but had been sold in auction prior to importation in India. Thus, it was concluded that the vehicle had been imported in violation of the Foreign Trade Policy. The original authority ordered for confiscation of the second-hand TD 2000 car and the u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is a cross appeal by the Department. 7. The Ld. Authorized Representative Shri R. Rajaraman supported the findings in the impugned order. 8. Heard both sides. 9. It has been argued by the Ld. Counsel for the appellant that the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) revising the value of the car is against the provisions contained in Section 128A of the Customs Act, 1962. We find that the appellant was not put to notice with regard to the issue of enhancing the declared value of the car. Thus, without having an opportunity to defend the enhancement of the value of the car, as decided by the original authority, the Commissioner (Appeals) has revised the value of the car to demand differential duty. 10. It is brought out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
