9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (9) TMI 404X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der per : Justice K.K. Usha, President]. This appeal at the instance of the Revenue is against the order-in-Appeal No. 4(KDT)Cus./ JPR/2001 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 28-2-2001. The main contention raised on behalf of the appellant is that the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in allowing the appeal by the assessee for the reason that the adjudicating authority confirmed the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble value USD 690 CIF PMT should not be recovered from them along with interest and why penal action should not be initiated under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. In reply, the assessee gave a detailed explanation referring to different options to be adopted for arriving at the assessable value of the imported goods. It contended that the proposal to fix the value of USD 690 CIF was not just ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is a matter to be considered on merits by the Commissioner (Appeals). On the other hand, the Commissioner (Appeals) had allowed the appeal filed by the assessee for the reason that the adjudicating authority was incorrect in confirming the demand based on totally new and undisclosed grounds for the first time in the impugned order itself. 4. We find merit in the contention raised by the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
