9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Jurisdiction of the Court under Section 130(E) of the Customs Act, 1962 regarding the appeal's maintainability based on the valuation of goods for assessment purposes.
Judgment Details: 1) The Respondents argued that the Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal due to Section 130(E) of the Customs Act, as the questions of law framed related to the value of goods for assessment. Therefore, they contended that the appeal was not maintainable. 2) The Appellants, on the other hand, referred to Section 14 of the Customs Act and stated that since valuation had already been done in the case, the issue of valuation did not arise. They cited a judgment in support of their argument. 3) The Court considered the Supreme Court's judgment in a related case where valuation had been completed, indicating that the issue was about working out the shortage, not valuation itself. 4) Upon reviewing a previous judgment of the Court, it was noted that the dispute in that case related to the valuation of goods. However, in the present matter, the questions framed were regarding penalties, not rate of duty or valuation. 5) The Court concluded that the present case did not involve questions of rate of duty or valuation but rather pertained to penalties, thus rejecting the objection raised about the Court's jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. 6) Ultimately, the Court found the objection to be without merit and upheld its jurisdiction to hear the appeal, dismissing the objection raised by the Respondents.
|
