9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 1256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... abling the proper officer of customs to determine RSP in a case where the importer did not declare RSP on the imported package and, on this basis, the demand of duty, interest and penalty were set aside – Stay granted. - Appeal No. C/25552/2013 - MISC. ORDER No. 25752 / 2013 - Dated:- 29-4-2013 - Mr. P.G. Chacko and Mr. B.S.V. Murthy, JJ. For the Appellant: Mr. Sujit Ghosh Ms. Kanupriya Bhargava, Advocates For the Respondent: Mr. R.K. Singla, Commissioner (AR) ORDER Per: P.G. Chacko; This application filed by the appellant seeks waiver and stay in respect of (a) Rs.1,10,29,877/- demanded as differential duty of customs on the goods imported by the appellant and sold to another company viz., Tatra Vectra Motor Ltd. ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issioner who held that the parts and components imported by the assessee were meant for the replacement market and hence attracted the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 and the rules framed thereunder and consequently the goods were liable to be valued on MRP/RSP basis in terms of the first proviso to Section 3(2) of the Customs Tariff Act read with Section 4A of the Central Excise Act for the purpose of payment of CVD. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant/appellant submitted that Section 3(2) of the Customs Tariff Act did not prescribe any procedure for valuation of imported goods on MRP/RSP basis and that Section 4A of the Central Excise Act was not applicable to the valuation of imported goods. The learn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the aforesaid stay order passed in the case of Sushil Agarwal. He pointed out that the prima facie view taken in the case of Sushil Agarwal was based on a judgment of the Supreme Court and hence the same could be followed. The learned Commissioner (AR) also adverted to the facts of the case and argued in support of the Revenue s case on merits. 4. After giving careful consideration to the submissions, we are of the view that waiver and stay can be granted in this case on the basis of the final order passed by this bench in the case of ABB Ltd. Nothing has been brought on record to show that the said final order has been set aside by the competent appellate court or that its operation has been stayed by the competent court. It was held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
