9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 735X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent. [Order per : Rakesh Kumar, Member (T)]. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against order-in-appeal dt. 16-2-05 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi by which he set aside the loading of the assessable value of certain goods imported by the Respondents. The Respondent had imported a consignment of camera and filed Bill of Entry No. 389684, dt. 6-11-04 for cle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als) s pleading that the loading is without any justification and that in view of Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Dunlop India Ltd. v. UOI reported in 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1566 (S.C.), the acceptance of enhanced value proposed by the department does not preclude them from challenging the enhancement by filing the appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) by the impugned order-in-appeal allowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [2005 (184) E.L.T. 310 (Tri.-Del.)]. He also pleaded that in all the cases, the value has been enhanced as the contemporaneous imports of identical or similar goods at the loaded value had been noticed. 2.2 Shri V.K. Agarwal, Advocate, ld. Counsel on behalf of the Respondent, pleaded that no evidence had been produced by the Revenue showing the contemporaneous import of identical or similar goo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has neither produced any evidence that this is not a stock lot sale nor it has produced any evidence of contemporaneous import of identical or similar goods in comparable quantity at higher price. 5. In view of this, we find no infirmity in the impugned order. The Revenue s appeal is dismissed. (Operative part of the order already pronounced in the open Court) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
