9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (5) TMI 396X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to in paragraph 6 in each of the applications (all being commonly worded) is that the Tribunal has not taken into account the contents of clause (d) to the proviso under sub-rule (2) of Rule 4 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The representative of the applicant points out that the Tribunal has specifically considered in paragraph 15 of its order, the submissions made by the departmental representative and refused to accept it on the ground that this is a new case now sought to be made and this clause was not at all in the notice issued to the party or in the Commissioner s order. The departmental representative seeks to contend that the documents on the basis of which this clause will apply were specified in the panchnama which was dr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epartment. The Commissioner in his order however refers to both these documents. We cannot do better in dealing with the ground of this appeal than reproducing the Interim Order No. CII/710-13/02, WZB of 21-2-2002 and communicated to both sides : 1. At the commencement of the hearing yesterday Mr. A. Chopra, the departmental representative handed over to the bench a folder containing various documents. None of these documents is signed or attested by anyone and each is a photocopy. Apart from the document which are on record such as copies of statement, these papers include what appears to be a document making legal propositions; copies of invoices and a proforma invoice, copies of correspondence between various parties. 2. On examina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... graph reproduces the Tribunal s order at Paragraph 15 and goes to say that the Tribunal has treated the mistake as the notice clearly alleges that under Rule 5 and not under Rule 4 and repeats that the Commissioner has said that he does not accept the importer s contention that the declared value was obtained after protracted negotiation and the Commissioner has applied Rule 10A. It is difficult to understand clearly what is the mistake that is alleged. The Tribunal has proceeded on the basis that the transaction value specified in Rule 4 was to be accepted as none of the contentions contained in the proviso under Clause (c) of that rule operative. This paragraph, appears to be an attempt to generally question the finding of the Tribunal fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
