2014 (1) TMI 1170 - AT - Customs

Enhancement in the value of the imported rough marble blocks - Enhancement done on bill of entry - Held that - to adopt the value of the contemporaneous imports, the transaction value is required to be rejected as incorrect/false on the basis of same evidence. Secondly, the contemporaneous imports value is required to be picked up after establishing that the goods match in the quality, quantity and country of origin and time period. There is nothing on record to reflect upon such facts - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against order of Commissioner (Appeals) enhancing value of imported rough marble blocks.
2. Validity of enhancement by Assistant Commissioner without providing reasons.
3. Acceptance of transaction value in absence of evidence showing it as incorrect.
4. Revenue's plea based on NIDB data for enhancement of value.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the enhancement of the value of imported rough marble blocks from different countries. The Commissioner had set aside the order of the original adjudicating authority, which had enhanced the value on the bill of entry itself.

2. The Appellate Tribunal found that the Assistant Commissioner had failed to provide reasons for enhancing the value and rejecting the transaction value. The Tribunal referred to previous decisions, including one by the Supreme Court, emphasizing that the transaction value should be accepted unless there is evidence to prove it incorrect or a special relationship between the supplier and the importer.

3. The Revenue had based their enhancement on NIDB data of contemporaneous imports of identical goods. However, the Tribunal dismissed this argument, stating that to adopt the value of contemporaneous imports, the transaction value must be proven incorrect based on the same evidence. Moreover, the value of contemporaneous imports should match in quality, quantity, country of origin, and time period, which was not established in this case.

4. Ultimately, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, as there was no merit in their argument based on the NIDB data. The decision was pronounced in open court, affirming the rejection of the Revenue's plea for enhancement of the imported rough marble blocks' value.