2008 (4) TMI 85 - AT - Customs

Departmental appeal against order of commissioner by which he set aside the assessment order enhancing the assessable value on basis of contemporaneous import dept. not able to specifically indicate any specific contemporaneous import assessee plea is that they never accepted to enhancement & they paid duty only to avoid demurrage charges In the absence of acceptance, speaking orders specifying the grounds should have been issued commissioner order is correct dept. appeal rejected

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 25.1.2005 regarding the enhancement of assessable value based on NIDB data for imported goods.

Analysis:
1. The respondent imported Polyester fabrics and PU Leather Cloth in 2004, with the Assessing Authority enhancing the value based on NIDB data. The duty was paid accordingly. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that the Department lacked evidence to justify the value enhancement, deeming the assessment orders improper.

2. The Department argued that the value enhancement was justified by NIDB data showing higher import prices. The respondent did not contest the enhancement or request a speaking order, leading to the duty payment. The Commissioner made a decision without seeking clarification from the Department, solely relying on the respondent's submissions.

3. The respondent's advocate contended that they never agreed to the value enhancement, done unilaterally by the Assessing Officer. The duty was paid to prevent demurrage, clear the goods promptly, and avoid blocking their investment. The bill of entries did not indicate acceptance of the enhancement by the respondent.

4. Upon review, it was found that the value enhancement was unilateral, without the respondent's agreement. The NIDB data provided by the Department did not specifically correlate to contemporaneous import prices. Arbitrary enhancements were made without seeking acceptance, and no endorsement of acceptance was found on the bill of entries.

5. The Tribunal concluded that there were no valid grounds to overturn the Commissioner (Appeals) decision. The appeal by the Department was dismissed, emphasizing the lack of acceptance by the respondent for the value enhancements and the absence of proper procedures followed in enhancing the assessable value.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key arguments, findings, and conclusions related to the appeal against the value enhancement based on NIDB data for imported goods, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal aspects involved in the case.