9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 350X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... % discount as per the guidelines of Commissioner of Customs (Import) - there was no contemporaneous import showing import of identical goods at a higher value, the rejection of the transaction value was not justified - in the absence of any corroborative evidence of contemporaneous imports, the enhancement of transaction value is not in accordance with the law - assessing officer has not brought o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,86,836/-. 4. The Assistant Commissioner loaded the value by US $ 0.09 (Rs.4.085) and USD $ 0.105 (Rs.4.77) per piece on ball bearing No. 6201 and 6202. Accordingly, the consequential demand of duties were confirmed. 5. Being aggrieved with the said order of assessment, the respondents filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). The said appellate authority allowed the appeal by observing that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccordance with the law. It was further observed that the assessing officer has not brought on record any evidence of contemporaneous imports. He accordingly, set aside the impugned order. 6. Revenue in their memo of appeal have raised various grounds. After going through the same, we find that the thrust of arguments is that relied upon decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court and of the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue of identical goods. Differentiating earlier decisions on the minor factual differentiation for submitting that the ratio of law declared in those cases would not be applicable, is not appropriate. As such, we find no reason to interfere in the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals), the same is accordingly upheld and Revenue s appeal is rejected. (Pronounced in the open court on 20.1.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
