9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 936X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in respect of contemporaneous imports - the goods mentioned in the invoices relied upon by the department has been shipped from different places such as Singapore, Hong Kong etc. and the quantities are also varying - Decided in favor of the assessee - C/1105/2009 - S/339/2011-WZB/C-I(CSTB) - Dated:- 8-8-2011 - S/Shri S.S. Kang, P.R. Chandrasekharan, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri A.M. Sachwani, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A.K. Prabhakar, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (T)]. The appeal and stay application are directed against order-in-appeal No. 253/2009/MCH/ AC/Gr.VB/2009 dated 16-9-2009 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai-I. 2. Briefly stated the facts of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The case was once again heard by the adjudicating authority vide order dated 26-12-2008 once again confirming the recovery of differential duty of Rs. 12,88,315/-. The party preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that even though the department provided only three invoices pertaining to contemporaneous imports, the relevant bills of entry in respect of those invoices were not provided to the appellant and also on the ground that while the show cause notice proposed to determine the assessable value under Rule 5, the order-in-original finally determined the value under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The learned appellate authority came to the conclusion that the determination of value under Rule 8 i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... level, the value cannot be determined under the provisions of Rule 5 and Rule 6 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 . Thereafter the adjudicating authority proceeded to determine the value under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. It is thus clear that the adjudicating authority has traversed beyond the show cause notice altogether and, therefore, on this ground alone the order is not sustainable. Secondly, if the value is determined under Rule 8, which is the residual method of valuation, the basis for determination of value has to be clearly spelt out. The order of the adjudicating authority does not indicate what is the basis for determination of the value and how he has arrived at the value which is different from those decl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
