9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 779X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mple of the goods tested in the department s laboratory. The Chemical Examiner reported thus :- The sample is whole garlic. It is other than dried garlic. Percentage of natural water content = 61.1% . On this basis, the Customs authorities considered the goods to be "fresh garlic falling under ITC (MS) Code 0703 20 00, which required specific import licence under the relevant EXIM Policy. The appellants had no such licence with them. The Customs authorities also suspected undervaluation. They proposed to enhance the value to US$ 565 per MT (CIF) on the basis of what they found to be import of identical goods from China covered by Bill of Entry No. 228214 dated 19-7-99 . The party accepted this enhancement of value and secured clearan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods, entered by the learned Chief Commissioner in the impugned order, is unsustainable. As regards value of the goods, it is the submission of the counsel that it was enhanced without any valid reason. The enhancement was ordered on the basis of what was found to be contemporaneous import of identical goods covered by certain Bill of Entry. But no copy of any Bill of Entry was furnished to the party. Ld. counsel further submits that particulars of a few contemporaneous imports of identical goods are available with the appellants and the same may be accepted in support of the declared value. The counsel has also reiterated the appellants grievance against the quanta of fine and penalty. We have heard the ld. SDR also, who apart from reite ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with them, which support the declared value. Admittedly, these particulars were not furnished to the adjudicating authority. In the circumstances, we are inclined to remand the case. 4. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside except in respect of the confiscation ordered under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act and direct the lower authority to pass a speaking order on all surviving issues after giving the party a reasonable opportunity of adducing evidence against impugned enhancement of value as also of being personally heard. The following particulars of what are claimed to be contemporaneous imports of identical goods, which have been furnished in the memo of the present appeal, in support of the challenge against the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
