2015 (9) TMI 1075 - HC - Customs

Valuation of goods - Reassessment of bill of entry - Held that - The order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) nowhere gives any justification for accepting the declared value by giving the reasons for the same. In the absence of any cogent reasons, direction for accepting the declared value by the Commissioner (Appeals) was unjustified. Accordingly, the Tribunal was right in staying the operation of the impugned order in appeal with regard to direction for reassessment of the bill of entry on the declared value. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Stay of operation of the order passed by Commissioner of Central Excise
2. Assessment of imported goods at a higher rate than the declared value

Issue 1 - Stay of operation of the order passed by Commissioner of Central Excise:
The appellant filed an appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act against the order passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) staying the operation of the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise. The Tribunal stayed the operation of the order dated 24.3.2014, passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), directing reassessment of bill of entries accepting the declared value. The appellant contended that there was no illegality in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal erred in staying its operation. On the other hand, the revenue argued that the direction to accept the declared value lacked justification. The High Court agreed with the revenue, stating that the Commissioner's order did not provide sufficient reasons for accepting the declared value. As a result, the Tribunal was justified in staying the operation of the order. The appeal was dismissed, emphasizing that the Tribunal should decide the appeal filed by the assessee promptly without expressing any opinion on the case's merits.

Issue 2 - Assessment of imported goods at a higher rate than the declared value:
The appellant, a manufacturer of copper wire rod, regularly imported copper cathode for its production needs. The appellant imported consignments based on contracts with foreign suppliers, declaring the transaction value. However, the Assistant Commissioner assessed the custom duty at a higher rate than the declared value, leading to additional duty payments by the appellant. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the assessment, directing reassessment on the declared value. The revenue challenged this decision before the Tribunal, which stayed the operation of the order. The High Court noted that the Commissioner's order lacked justification for accepting the declared value without providing reasons. Consequently, the Tribunal's decision to stay the operation of the order was deemed appropriate. The appeal was dismissed, emphasizing the need for a prompt decision by the Tribunal without expressing any opinion on the case's merits.