9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (2) TMI 435X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essable value. In other words they rejected the transaction value under Rule 4(2)(c) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The SVB loaded the value to the extent of 11.1%. This proposal was upheld by the Additional Commissioner of Customs (SVB), who directed finalization of all the pending provisional assessments on such basis. While doing so, ld. Additional Commissioner accepted that there was no relation between the assessees and the German supplier within the meaning of this term under Rule 2(2) of the Valuation Rules. Ld. Additional Commissioner, in his order, further, directed as under :- 3. All their future imports shall be assessed based upon the International Price Lists without extending any discount. 4. The above decision has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd stay of recovery inasmuch as those goods have already been cleared on payment of adjudged dues, though their challenge against the legality of the assessments relating to those imports remains to be examined. 2. The present application is for stay of operation of the direction of the lower authorities for enhancing value of future imports on the same basis as applied to the imports of 2005. Ld. Counsel submits that, in respect of the goods purchased by the appellants from the German supplier after December 2005, they have not received any discount on the listed prices. This submission of ld. Counsel is supported by the relevant price list of the supplier accompanied by the covering letter, both these documents available on record. Ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made in the year 2006. It is submitted by Id. Counsel that the transaction value of the goods imported by the assessee in 2006 was not a discounted price. Thus Id. Counsel urges that there is exceptional circumstance for the appellants to pray for stay of operation of the orders of the lower authorities relating to future imports . The expression future imports occurring in this order covers the imports already made by the assessee in the year 2006. 3. We have heard Id. SDR also who opposes the above prayer on the strength of the findings recorded by the Additional Commissioner. 4. After considering the submissions made by both sides, we are of the view that the operation of that part of the Additional Commissioner s order which has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
