2016 (3) TMI 468 - AT - Customs

Basis of valuation - Unacceptable by Revenue - Revenue contended that it has not given an opportunity of hearing by the Commissioner (Appeals) and also the basis of valuation is incorrect because it is based on Chartered Engineer s certificate which did not contain all the relevant details as per the C.B.E. & C. circular but for the same it did not issued show cause notice to the respondent - Held that - any enhancement of value will be to the disadvantage of the respondent who was never given a show cause notice regarding valuation in the first place. In the absence of show cause notice it is not possible to dispute at a later stage that the valuation adopted by the primary adjudicating authority as upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) is incorrect particularly when the basis of valuation is not arbitrary or unreasonable. In the absence of the Chartered Engineer s certificate in the prescribed format, valuation was made on the basis of material available. Also for no opportunity of hearing was given to Revenue by the Commissioner (Appeals) do not sustain because the principles of natural justice were given a go-by the Revenue at the time of primary adjudication order inasmuch as Revenue did not issue show cause notice to the respondent. Therefore, Revenue cannot cry foul on that score at a later stage when it itself violated the principles of natural justice. - Decided against the revenue

Summary

Issues: Valuation of goods for customs assessment, Opportunity of hearing violation by Revenue

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi, the Revenue filed an appeal against an order that upheld the valuation of goods but reduced the redemption fine and personal penalty. The Revenue contended that they were not given an opportunity by the Commissioner (Appeals) and that the basis of valuation was incorrect due to missing details in the Chartered Engineer's certificate. The Tribunal noted that no show cause notice was issued, and the primary adjudication order accepted the value proposed by the Chartered Engineer. The Commissioner (Appeals) found the valuation basis acceptable and rejected Revenue's appeal. The Revenue only questioned the missing details in the certificate and lack of a personal hearing. The Tribunal emphasized that without a show cause notice, disputing the valuation later is not valid, especially when the valuation basis is reasonable. Since the Revenue did not follow principles of natural justice by not issuing a show cause notice initially, they cannot claim a lack of hearing opportunity later. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, finding no merit in their arguments.