2008 (7) TMI 765 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Dispute over the value of goods declared by the respondent
- Allegation of importing goods without a specific license
- Decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) to enhance the declared value

Analysis:

The case involved an appeal by the Revenue against an order where the Commissioner (Appeals) had rejected the declared value of goods by the respondent, enhancing it to USD 0.6 per kg. The Revenue contended that the respondent had imported goods and declared the value at USD 0.6 per kg, which was accepted by the adjudicating authority. However, the dispute raised by the appellant was regarding the import of goods without a specific license, not the valuation. The respondent had argued that they applied for an import license, which was rejected after placing the order on the supplier. The Commissioner (Appeals) erroneously enhanced the value without it being in dispute before the adjudicating authority.

Upon reviewing the adjudication orders, it was found that the issue before the adjudicating authority solely pertained to the import of goods without a specific license, with submissions made in that regard. As the matter of valuation was not raised during adjudication, the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in enhancing the value to USD 0.6 per kg. Consequently, the appellate tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order on valuation, reinstating the assessment made by the assessing authority. The appeals filed by the Revenue were allowed as a result of this finding.

The judgment, delivered collectively for multiple appeals due to a common issue, clarified the distinction between the disputed matters of import licensing and valuation of goods. By emphasizing that the issue of valuation was not in contention before the adjudicating authority, the tribunal upheld the original assessment made by the authority, thereby resolving the dispute in favor of the Revenue.