9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (6) TMI 175 - AT - CustomsEnhancement of value - Import of textile fabrics laminated with PVC enhancement of value of impugned goods textile fabric laminated with PVC on basis of higher value of PU/PVC Leather Cloth , is not justified appeal of revenue is dismissed
Issues:
1. Appeal against the order setting aside enhanced value of imported goods. 2. Acceptance of enhanced value and duty payment by the respondent. 3. Differential duty adjustment against amount already deposited. 4. Comparison with import value declared by other importers. 5. Finalization of assessment after provisional release of goods. Analysis: The appeal was filed against the order setting aside the enhanced value of textile fabrics laminated with PVC imported by the respondent. The Revenue contended that the respondent had accepted the enhanced value and paid duty, making the impugned order unsustainable. The Revenue also pointed out similar imports by other importers declaring the value at U.S. $ 1.08 per meter. However, the respondent argued that they did not accept the enhanced value and suggested adjusting the differential duty from the amount already deposited with the Revenue. They also highlighted that other importers declared the value at U.S. $ 0.70 per meter, which was later enhanced by the Revenue to U.S. $ 1.08 per meter. During the import in 1997, the goods were provisionally released, and the final assessment was done in 2005. The respondent had deposited a certain amount during this period. The Revenue sought to enhance the value based on a bill of entry for similar goods supported at a higher value. However, the Director of Valuation's letter indicated that the international price for PU/PVC leather cloth was not available, suggesting a minimum price of U.S. $ 1.80 per meter for different goods. As the goods in question were textile fabric laminated with PVC, distinct from those mentioned in the letter, the Tribunal found no issue with the impugned order and dismissed the appeal. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the order setting aside the enhanced value of the imported goods, considering the differences in the goods imported and the lack of evidence supporting the Revenue's claim for enhanced valuation. The Tribunal's decision was based on the specific circumstances of the case, emphasizing the need for accurate valuation and differentiation between goods for proper assessment.
|
