9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 576X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whether the goods under import are "Black Bhokri" or not. The opinion of the laboratory when remained doubtful, that is not acceptable to law. So far as the valuation issue is concerned, there is no material shown to us to disturb the transaction value declared by the appellant. It is rule of law that to reject the transaction value, the department should state the reason why the transaction value declared is not correct. In the present case, the imports being of 2002, Customs Valuation Rules, 1998 applies. To proceed with a best judgement assessment, Rule 10A requires record of reasoning in case the transaction value declared by importer is disbelieved. There is no such reason recorded since nothing was brought to our notice while pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing descriptions were imported by the respective appellants in the appeals noted against each : S.No. Appeal No. Appellant Name Bill of Entry No. Description of the Item 1. C/363/2005 Haji Sattar Sons 24247 dt. 23.12.2002 Black Bhokri, Raisins (Dry Grapes) 2. C/375/2005 S.K. Sales Agencies 24194 24195 both dt. 23.12.2002 Black Mavish 3. C/376/2005 Ramakrishna Co. 22344 dt.21.11.2002 Black Mavish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. On the other hand, Revenue submits that appellant misdeclared the goods in two cases at.No.2 and 3 of the Table as above, as 'raisin' although the goods imported were Black Mavish . The testing laboratory opined in favour of Revenue. The contemporaneous evidence dealt in the order suggested against the appellant demonstrating that the transaction value declared was depressed and there was undervaluation of the goods imported. 5. Heard both sides and perused the record. 6. So far as the description of the goods is concerned, the character of the goods was 'raisin' only when the laboratory could not opine properly. Also, we find that there was a leading question put to the laboratory to opine in favour of Revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld have appealed to agree with Revenue. But no such exercise has been made by Adjudicating Authority to meet the requirement of law. Therefore, the transaction value declared is not possible to be disturbed. 9. We have considered the grievance of Revenue in the light of Rule 10A of the 1998 Valuation Rules. That rule requires a recorded reason backed by cogent evidence to doubt the value declared by the importer. For convenience of reading, the said rule is reproduced below :- 10A. Rejection of declared value. (1) When the proper officer has reason to doubt the truth or accuracy of the value declared in relation to any imported goods, he may ask the importer of such goods to furnish further information including documents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
