2019 (7) TMI 1813 - AT - Customs

Valuation of imported goods - Polyester Knitted Fabrics and other similar goods - rejection of declared values - re-assessment of the impugned bills of entries at enhanced values - exemption from payment of CVD denied under N/N. 30/2004-Central Excise dated 09.07.2004 - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The judgements relied upon by the Revenue in this appeal, were not placed before the court below - Secondly, the court below has not appreciated the scope of Section 17(5) read with Section 17 (4) of the Customs Act. Importer cannot be allowed to play a cat mouse game with the Revenue. This appeal is allowed by way of remand to the Commissioner (Appeals) for re-appreciation of the facts in accordance with law and also considering the observations of this Tribunal. The Commissioner (Appeals) is expected to pass a denovo order in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of declared values and re-assessment of bills of entries.
2. Rejection of benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE dated 9.7.2014.

Analysis:
1. The Commissioner (Appeals) considered whether the assessing authority was justified in rejecting the declared values and re-assessing the bills of entries at enhanced values. It was noted that the importer had accepted the enhanced values for some bills of entry to avoid demurrages but still had the right to challenge the enhancement through appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) referred to legal precedents stating there is no estoppel in taxation matters, allowing the appeal and restoring the assessment at declared values.

2. The issue of rejecting the benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE was also examined. The Revenue contended that the importer's consent to enhanced values precluded them from challenging the assessment. Legal arguments were presented citing judicial decisions and tribunal rulings regarding the acceptance of values and the principle of estoppel. However, the Tribunal found that relevant judgments were not considered, and the scope of Customs Act sections was not fully appreciated by the lower court. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, remanding the case for re-evaluation by the Commissioner (Appeals) within a specified timeframe, emphasizing compliance with the law and tribunal observations.

This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI highlights the key issues, legal arguments, and the Tribunal's decision to remand the case for further consideration.