9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 573X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Respondent ORDER Per: Bench The facts of the case are that appellant imported Rechargeable Lamps PRL 228 valued at US$ 0.75 per piece vide Bill of Entry No.938320 dt. 03.01.2006. On examination, the goods were found to be "PREMIER" brand Rechargeable Portable Lamps, Model-PRL 228 (8WX2) Emergency Lamps and goods were found to be affixed with MRP stickers of Rs. 100/- each individual packs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section112 (a) ibid. On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order dt. 31.3.2008 upheld the order of original authority. Hence this appeal. 2. On 08.08.2017, when the matter came up for hearing, on behalf of appellant, Ld. Advocate Shri A.K. Jayaraj submits that the value declared by appellant is correct and true value; that statement taken from appellant is not voluntary statement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd therefore had told the supplier to send invoices for US$ 0.75 per piece and that the correct price is US$ 1.30 per piece. 4. Heard both sides and have gone through the facts. 5. No doubt, the appellant had based their assessable value on invoice price of US$ 0.75 per piece. However, no grounds have been evidenced for rejecting the said declared value as not being transaction value. Even so, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , is certainly not the accepting manner of arriving at assessable value. There are spate of Tribunal decisions against setting aside enhancement of declared value on the basis of NIDB data. In the event, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned order upholding the enhancement of the assessable value of the imported goods cannot sustain and will have to be set aside in toto which we hereb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
