9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (9) TMI 112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which was filed, it was stated that the country of origin of the goods was Singapore and the price at which the goods were to be cleared for consumption was declared at US $ 4.25 per piece. 2.The Collector of Customs vide his order dated 28th October, 1993 did not accept the valuation as declared by the respondent. He took into consideration one quotation dated 16th April, 1993 from a Singapore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the said decision considered the evidence relied upon by the Collector and also adverted to evidence produced by the respondent herein in the form of bills of entry dated 12th August, 1993 for US $ 22 per piece and 27th August, 1993 for US $ 16 per piece. The latter bills of entry had not been accepted by the Collector on the ground that they were of a period six months subsequent to the bill of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Taking into account the fact that the quantity imported by the respondent was more than what was imported by the Hyderabad company, he gave a discount of 20 per cent on the price list and arrived at a figure of US $ 33.6 per piece FOB. The Commissioner of Customs in a sense upheld and followed the earlier order of the Collector except that the amount of redemption fine and penalty was reduced to R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is evidence the appeal filed by the respondent deserved to be allowed and the order of confiscation and enhancement of the value set aside. Hence, this appeal. 7.In our opinion, the order of the Tribunal is wrong and erroneous, to say the least, for more than one reasons. Firstly, the effect of the order of the Tribunal is that the original value of US $ 4.25 disclosed by the respondent stands ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issioner was based on the evidence which had already been rejected earlier. The Tribunal in the impugned order overlooked the fact that the decision of the Commissioner on remand was based on the import made by the Hyderabad company at US $ 42 per piece and after giving a discount for the large number of pieces imported, the FOB value arrived at was US $ 33.6 per piece. The order of the Tribunal, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
