2017 (7) TMI 668 - AT - Customs

Natural justice - non-issue of notice u/s 124 of the CA, 1962 - propriety of enhancement of value of the imported goods - Held that - while Section 110 (2) requires issue of notice under Section 124, the latter has an inbuilt exception for not issuing such written notice. The proviso to Section 124 ibid provides that such notice may, at the request person of the concerned be oral - appellant had clearly waived his right for a SCN and in consequence, the proviso to Section 124 ibid will take effect, accordingly no notice in writing is then required to be served. Enhancement of value - Held that - as correctly observed by lower appellate authority, there is only a marginal difference in the unit price between the earlier assessed value and that finally assessed vide the adjudication. In view thereof, no reason can be alluded to the enhancement of assessable value to US 0.45/mtr based on the contemporaneous import prices suggested by the appellant themselves. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Effect of non-issue of notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962
2. Propriety of enhancement of value of the imported goods

Analysis:

Issue 1: Effect of non-issue of notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962
The appellant argued that no show cause notice was issued as required under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, and the department did not issue a written notice under Section 124 before confiscation, rendering the proceedings improper. However, the proviso to Section 124 allows for oral notice upon request of the concerned person. The importers had indeed requested adjudication without a written notice but with a personal hearing. The appellant waived the right for a written notice, and a personal hearing was provided, fulfilling the legal requirements. The Tribunal found no infirmity with the lower authority's decision, as the appellant was put on oral notice at their own request, complying with the provisions of the Customs Act.

Issue 2: Propriety of enhancement of value of the imported goods
Initially, the Appraising Group increased the declared value of the goods based on contemporaneous import prices. Subsequently, after an investigation by SIIB, the value was proposed to be further enhanced. However, the original authority accepted the importer's argument based on a contemporaneous import by another entity, limiting the enhancement to a certain value. The Tribunal noted that the enhancement was marginal and based on prices suggested by the appellant themselves. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the lower appellate authority regarding the enhancement of the assessable value, as there was no substantial reason to object to the increase based on the evidence and circumstances presented.

In conclusion, the appeal was dismissed as the Tribunal found no merit in the arguments presented by the appellant. The judgment highlighted the importance of compliance with procedural requirements under the Customs Act and the significance of evidence and circumstances in determining the assessable value of imported goods.