9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 567X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2-9-2005. The Additional Commissioner enhance the value of Computer Monitors and P-III systems imported by the appellants vide their Bill of Entry 2526 dated 12-7-2005 from a total value of GBP 5974.15 declared to Rs. 10,29,861/- and in respect of Bill of Entry No. 2571 dated 27-7-2005 from the total value is US $ 10560 declared to Rs. 10,50,105/-. The goods were confiscated under Section 111(d) of Customs Act, 1962 for violation of EXIM Policy with an option to redeem the goods at redemption fine of Rs. 2.5 lakh and penalty of Rs. 75,000/- in respect of Order-in-Appeal No. 75/2005 and redemption fine of Rs. 2.5 lakh and penalty of Rs. 80,000/- in respect of Order-in-Appeal No. 76/2005. The appellants have challenged the enhancement of valu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Apex Court confirming the valuation arrived at on the basis of Chartered Engineer s valuation has not been agreed to by the Apex Court in the case of Motor Industries case and the earlier judgment in Ruqmini Ram Raghav Spinners Pvt. Ltd. v. CC, Chennai - 1998 (103) E.L.T. 366 has been deferred to. The learned counsel submits that the Motor Industries Co. Ltd. (supra) judgment is based on large number of earlier judgments of Apex Court which has presidential value and requires to be accepted. He also relied on large number of Tribunal rulings and submitted a paper book. He submits that the valuation in terms of transaction value has to be accepted and that the fine and penalty has to be reduced to 10% and 5% as held by the Tribunal in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of Motor Industries Co. Ltd. case in Civil Appeal No. 7179/2002 by their judgment dated 23-4-2008 relying on large number of judgments cited supra has held that revenue cannot proceed to assess the goods in terms of Rules 5 to 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules by rejecting the transaction value. It has been held that so long as transaction value is correct and there is absence of evidence, then the same is required to be accepted. In view of this position and in absence of any corroborative evidence produced by the revenue to reject the transaction value, we have to uphold that the transaction value as declared in respect of Bill of Entries. Therefore, the enhancement of the transaction value in the present cases is set aside. 5.1 In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
