2017 (5) TMI 1533 - AT - Customs

Valuation - import from related party in Singapore - validity of SCN - principles of natural justice - Held that - when there is no evidence to demolish the findings of the authorities below, even though sixteen grounds in appeal have been raised, appellant s mere statement that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is not in accordance with the law is of no significance and unreasoned - There were no material evidence before learned Commissioner (Appeals) suggesting that the appellant has replied to the questionnaire properly furnishing relevant documents. The appeal is dismissed with a clear observation that there was no denial of natural justice.

Summary

Issues: Determination of assessable value of import from related party, Non-cooperation of the appellant with authorities, Lack of evidence provided by the appellant, Upholding of adjudication by appellate authority, Dismissal of the appeal.

The judgment deals with a case involving the determination of the assessable value of an import from a related party in Singapore. The appellant did not cooperate with the authorities during the adjudication process, leading to the non-production of essential documents related to the joint venture agreement. The learned authority passed an ex-parte order justifying the addition of 30% to the declared value under Rule 9(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The appellant failed to provide complete evidence even before the appellate authority, resulting in the Commissioner (Appeals) being unable to assess whether an addition to the assessable value was warranted. The appellate authority upheld the adjudication due to the appellant's dilatory tactics and lack of cooperation, which kept the department in the dark.

During both the adjudication and appellate stages, the appellant did not provide the necessary documents for examination by the department, specifically related to the joint venture project for which the import was made. The grounds of appeal were examined in the absence of the appellant, who only prayed to set aside the appellate authority's order without providing substantial reasons. Despite raising sixteen grounds in the appeal, the appellant's mere statement that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was not in accordance with the law held no significance due to the lack of evidence to challenge the findings of the authorities below. The appellate authority found no material evidence suggesting that the appellant had properly replied to the questionnaire by furnishing relevant documents.

Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed with a clear observation that there was no denial of natural justice in the proceedings. The judgment highlights the importance of cooperation and providing necessary evidence during legal proceedings to ensure a fair and just determination of issues related to valuation and compliance with customs rules.