1999 (7) TMI 477 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Permission to submit additional evidence in appeal.
2. Valuation of imported goods under Customs Valuation Rules.
3. Consideration of contemporaneous imports for valuation.
4. Remand of the matter to the Commissioner for fresh consideration.

Analysis:
1. The appellants sought permission to submit additional evidence in the form of copies of Bill of Entry covering imports of similar goods at Mumbai, which they did not possess during the original proceedings. The Tribunal allowed the request as the evidence had value being contemporaneous imports at the port of Mumbai, thus granting permission for submission of additional evidence.

2. The appeal challenged the Order-in-Original passed by the Commissioner of Customs, which confiscated dry ginger imported under two Bills of Entry, allowing redemption fine due to under-declaration of value. The appellants contested the valuation done under Customs Valuation Rules and presented evidence of contemporaneous imports at Mumbai with a lower assessed value of US $ 800 per MT compared to the enhanced valuation of US $ 1200 per MT. The Tribunal held that the fresh evidence of contemporaneous imports needed to be considered for uniform valuation, setting aside the original order and remanding the matter for re-consideration.

3. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering contemporaneous imports for uniform valuation, citing precedents such as N.K. Aggarwal v. CC and Bombay Pharma Products v. CC. The Tribunal held that since Mumbai Customs accepted a lower declared value for similar goods imported around the same period, the Commissioner needed to reevaluate the valuation of the consignments in light of this new evidence, ensuring effective opportunity of hearing to the appellants during the reevaluation process.

4. Ultimately, the appeal succeeded by way of remand, directing the Commissioner to conduct a fresh consideration of the valuation issue, taking into account the evidence of contemporaneous imports from Mumbai. The Tribunal's decision highlighted the significance of uniform valuation practices and the need for fair and thorough evaluation of evidence in customs valuation matters.