TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 777X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... seen that apart from the vague submission that the original authority did not conduct any thorough verification there is no specific grounds raised that there is undervaluation. There is no material pointed out to show that that the price quoted for similar goods as per NIDB data or contemporaneous imports is higher or different from the value adopted by the respondent. The argument in regard to amendment of Rule 10 is also not material to be considered for the reason that for the disputed period (2010-2013) the respondent has not paid any royalty or technical know-how fee. Therefore, the amendment has no bearing to decide the issue as to whether the transaction value accepted by the department is proper. The appeal filed by the dep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the transaction value. The said order was passed for the period 2001-2003. After the said order, there has been amendment to Rule 10 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The said order therefore cannot be applied for the imports made for the disputed period 2010-2013. It is submitted by the Ld. A.R that the original authority has merely relied upon the affidavit filed by the respondent and held that the transaction value can be accepted. As per the procedure, the respondent has to file Annexure Y, Statement 'A' and Statement 'B' along with the request for SVB Valuation. In the present case, there is no discussion as to the said requirement complied by the importer. For this reason also, the order passed by the original author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, there is no question of considering the same. This aspect has been discussed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order. It is also pointed out by the Ld. Counsel for the appellant that appellant had filed an affidavit stating that the conditions which were prevailing for the earlier period still continues and that there is no change of circumstances. The original authority after verification of documents submitted by the appellant and necessary investigation has held that the transaction value can be accepted. The department has not been able to produce any evidence to show that there is any change of circumstances or any evidence for undervaluation. It is prayed that the appeal may be dismissed. 4. Heard both sides. 5. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
