2024 (5) TMI 1065 - AT - Customs

Undervaluation - Imports timber from various countries - contemporaneous imports - Burden of proof - duty demand - penalty and interest - third-party documents and statements - HELD THAT - In the case of Beena Sales Corporation 2019 (3) TMI 982 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD , it can be seen that all the documents and evidences are common which have been relied upon in the present cases also, therefore, the above decision in Beena Sales Corporation, is directly applicable in the present appeals also. Moreover, the decision of Beena Sales Corporation has been upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court. Thus, following the Beena Sales Corporation decision, the impugned orders are not sustainable. Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside. All the appeals are allowed with consequential relief.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Allegation of undervaluation of imported timber.
2. Reliance on common investigation and evidence.
3. Applicability of the Beena Sales Corporation case.
4. Validity of statements and documents seized.
5. Determination of transaction value under Customs Valuation Rules.

Summary:

1. Allegation of Undervaluation of Imported Timber:
The case involves a common investigation by DRI based on documents recovered from Shri Rajendra Agarwal and Shri Avinash Jindal, alleging that the appellant undervalued imported timber. Show cause notices were issued proposing enhanced value, consequential duty demand, penalty, and interest.

2. Reliance on Common Investigation and Evidence:
The investigation and evidence, including statements and documents, are common across all appeals and the Beena Sales Corporation case. The Tribunal noted that the facts, evidence, and investigation are identical in all cases.

3. Applicability of the Beena Sales Corporation Case:
The Tribunal's decision in Beena Sales Corporation, which allowed the appeal, was upheld by the Supreme Court. The Tribunal found that the same documents and evidence were relied upon in the present appeals, making the Beena Sales Corporation decision directly applicable.

4. Validity of Statements and Documents Seized:
The Tribunal found that the statements of Shri Rajendra Agarwal and Shri Avinash Jindal were retracted and their veracity was denied. Documents seized from these individuals were not corroborated by independent evidence. The Tribunal held that such uncorroborated statements and documents could not substantiate the allegation of undervaluation.

5. Determination of Transaction Value Under Customs Valuation Rules:
The Tribunal emphasized that the transaction value must be accepted unless proven otherwise with tangible evidence. The Tribunal cited several precedents, including the Supreme Court's decisions, to support that the transaction value declared by the importer should be accepted unless there is credible evidence of undervaluation.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders, allowing all appeals with consequential relief, following the precedent set in the Beena Sales Corporation case, which was upheld by the Supreme Court. The Tribunal found no sustainable evidence to support the allegations of undervaluation.