9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order]. - There are two applications before me, both filed by the appellants, one for waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery in respect of the duty and penalty amounts and the other seeking early disposal of the appeal. After examining the records and hearing both sides, I am of the view that the appeal itself requires to be disposed of finally at this stage. Accordingly, after dispensing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asis of this report, the assessable value of the goods was proposed to be enhanced. As the assessee waived show-cause notice, such assessment was made. Hence the differential demand of duty on the item imported by the appellants. Apart from this, the original authority ordered confiscation of the goods also, after finding that the goods had been mis-declared in the Bill of Entry. It imposed a fine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this enhancement of value and is prepared to pay duty on the enhanced value. The question now is whether the new-found description of the goods is of any significance to the valuation dispute. It is absolutely insignificant inasmuch as the dispute is what should be the correct value of the goods. The correct value is the one determined by the Commissioner and the same has not been challenged in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fully misdeclared the goods with intention to evade duty. Having found so, the Tribunal set aside the order of confiscation and redemption fine. The facts of the cited case are apparently similar to those of the instant case. The appellants had described the goods and declared its value as in the relevant invoice issued by the supplier. Hence they cannot be held to have "misdeclared" the descripti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
