2016 (6) TMI 305

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the Respondent ORDER The appeal is against order dated 03/2/2015 of Commissioner (Appeals), New Delhi. The brief facts of the case relevant to this appeal are that the appellants filed three bills of entry for clearance of imported Synthetic Knitted Fabric. The Assessing Authority ordered for enhancement of value from U.S. $ 1.30 per kg. to U.S. $ 2.50 per kg. based on other contemporaneous .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who recorded that the three orders passed by Commissioner (Appeals) on identical set of facts had in fact resulted in two sets of outcome, namely, the first order-in-appeal 337 dated 27/5/2013 gave detailed finding against enhancement of value, set aside the original order both on value enhancement and on penalty. However, two other appellate orde .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... were filed, and later rejected, did not give a clear finding regarding enhancement of value though the para dealing with the said enhancement is verbatim reproduction in all the three orders. Somehow the final finding portion are not figuring in the two of the appellate orders. In the absence of such finding specifically against enhancement of value, at this stage the rejection of refund cannot b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X