9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (6) TMI 252X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anging from 700 to 708 US $ MT, the Customs authorities ordered the assessment of the goods on enhanced value ranging from 998 US $ PMT to 1041 PMT. Details are available in the table below : S. No. B/E No. Value declared US $ MT CIF Value fixed by Customs US $ MT CIF 1 11626 dated 16-12-99 709 998.344 2 12298 dated 29-1-2000 708 998.344 3 12511 dated 10-2-2000 700 1043.143 4 13222 dated 27-3-2000 700 1041.563 2. Findings for enhancement of value recorded by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Kandla who adjudicated the cases are as under : Findings I have carefully gone through the facts and evi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not produce any convincing reasons, why the goods were sold to them at the value lower than the value prevalent in the international market during the relevant period. Party also did not produce any evidence, other than the invoiced that the value in the international market prevalent at that time was the same as mentioned in their invoice. Looking into the above fact, I do not accept the invoice value. 3. Appeals were filed before the Commissioner (Appeals), Ahmedabad against the above orders. They were rejected. Hence the present appeals. 4. The contention of the appellant is that the assessment orders passed by the lower authorities are contrary to the specific legal provisions on the subject contained in Section 14 of the Customs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant had also pointed out that another import from Korea had taken place at Nhava Sheva Port at the rate of US $ 730 MT, but no note is being taken of it. The learned Counsel pointed out that it would appear from the order of adjudication that the only reason for doubting the invoice price was the fact that Chemical Market Reporter, a Journal has indicated higher transaction values for these goods in the international trade. It is the submission of the appellants that reporting of a higher value in Market Reporters is no ground for enhancement of value. According to him, it is settled law (Eicher Tractors Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai (supra) that transaction value is confined to the particular transaction (i.e. to the goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 730 US $ PMT. The appellant s prices are somewhat close to that price, which was for export from Korea to India. This should have reassured the Customs authorities that the declared value represented commercial price. Further, it is settled law that transaction value cannot be rejected except for the reasons mentioned in the Valuation Rules. No such ground exists in the present case. A mere doubt emanating from journal reports is no ground. 6. It is equally well settled that prices indicated in price bulletins is no basis for rejecting transaction values. [Prabhu Dayal Prem Chand v. C.C., New Delhi - 2002 (53) RLT 891 (CEGAT - Del.)]. In the present case, the proceedings have also been concluded in an unjust manner inasmuch as the materia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
