9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1341X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Oriental Equipments and Machineries, Singapore. On scrutiny of Bill of Entry, the department was of the view that the declared value is very low and therefore goods were subject to first check for the purpose of determination of assessable value for the following reasons :- a. that the value declared of the parts of excavator works out to around Rs. 42.10/Kg, which was even less than the value of that of old and used excavators b. that the value declared is very low in relation to the NIDB values of contemporaneous import of similar goods; c. that the value of similar goods had already come under scrutiny of SIIB, Custom House, Tuticorin and value was enhanced for previous imports of similar consignments by the importer at Tu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3878 TOTAL 46,654 1292315.80 The goods vis-a-vis other comparable imports based on NIDB data indicated that the assessable value would be Rs. 24.72 lakhs. A query was put in the EDI systems and importer was asked to furnish documents. However importer did not furnish any documents. Show Cause Notice was issued proposing to reject the declared value, for enhancement of value differential duty demand and for imposing penalties. After due process of law the original authority passed the following order. i. I accept the value of Item no.3,4,5,7 & 23 of Bill of Entry No.425999 dated 17.12.2007 as transaction value in absence of any value Data base and the remaining of 18 utems the value d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 3097 3097 14 Ex-300 - 1 Swing Circle Assy. 24930 93877 70670 15 Ex-300-1 top Roller 886.4 1545.34 1545.34 16 Ex-60 1 Track link 8310 12805.79 10314 17 PC-100 Tooth 177.80 234.75 199 18 PC-60 Tooth 150.97 199 199 The Total duty works out to Rs. 6,49,713/- (Six Lakhs forty nine thousand seven hundred and thirteen only) on the determined value of Rs. 20,95,080/-. The importer should pay the same forthwith. 3. Being aggrieved by the above order of enhanced assessment of value, the appellants filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide order impugned herein, upheld the same. Hence this appeal. 4. On behalf of the appellant, the Ld.Counsel Shri.Murugappan reite ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... * In respect of Item No.22, the Ld.Counsel submitted that the enhancement is made on the basis of the Bill of Entry / Import made by the appellant which was subject matter of dispute in Appeal No.C/192/2008 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide F.O.41547/17 dt.10.8.17 had set aside the enhancement of value for the said Bill of Entry observing that such enhancement is made on the basis of NIDB data alone. 6. Ld.Counsel relied upon the apellants own case passed by the Tribunal vide F.O.41547/17 dt.10.8.17 and also relied upon the judgements as under :- (i) TOPSIA ESTATES PVT LTD. Vs COMMR. OF CUS. (IMPORT-SEAPORT), CHENNAI 2015 (330) E.L.T.799 (Tri. - Chennai) (ii) ANEJA STEELS Vs COMMISSIONER OF C.EX., NO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the basis of NIDB data and therefore requires to be set aside which we hereby do. In respect of items in S.Nos.1,12 and 21, the enhancement is not on the basis of NIDB data or contemporaneous imports of identical goods, but the value is enhanced on the basis of other models' descriptions which in our view cannot be taken as the basis for enhancement. Such enhancement requires to be set aside, which we hereby do. In respect of Item No.22, the enhancement is based on the enhanced value of the Bill of Entry which was in dispute in the appellant's own case in Appeal No.C/192/08. The enhancement having been set aside by this Bench vide Final Order stated (supra), the enhancement in respect of Item No.22 also requires to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
