9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 147X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact. It is such a common knowledge for anyone dealing in the import of such goods that old and used goods require import licence. Thus the appellant willfully chose to infringe the import export policy by importing the said goods without import licence. We find that valuation has been done on reasonable basis and having not contested the same at the levels of primary adjudicating authority as well as first appellate authority, it is not open for it to contest the same at the level of the Tribunal as has been held by CESTAT in the case of Vikas Spinners vs. C.C., Lucknow [2000 (11) TMI 196 - CEGAT, COURT NO. IV, NEW DELHI]. - Decided against assessee. - Customs Appeal No.220 of 2010 - Final Order No.52523/2015 - Dated:- 5-8-2015 - Mr. R. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay there was no representation on behalf of the appellant nor was there any request for adjournment. Therefore, we proceed to decide the case on merits. 5. In this case , we find that the appellant had voluntarily chosen to forgo the requirement of issuance of show cause notice and therefore the contention that the order has been issued in violation of principle of natural justice, is not sustainable. The principle of natural justice merely require that nobody shall be condemned unheard. But there is no restriction on the person voluntarily forgoing its right for a show cause notice or personal hearing. There is no dispute that the goods , being old and used, required import licence which the appellant did not possess and he was aware of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t any protest or objection they are legally estopped from taking somersault and to deny the correctness of the same. There is nothing on record to suggest that the loaded value was accepted by them only for the purpose of clearance of the goods and that they reserved their right to challenge the same subsequently. They settled their duty liability once for all and paid the duty amount on the loaded value of the goods. The ratio of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sounds N. Images, (supra) is not at all attracted to the case of the appellants. The benefit of this ratio could be taken by them only if they had contested the loaded value at the time when it was done, but not now after having voluntarily accepted the correctness of loaded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
