9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Rule 3(3)(b) came to the conclusion that the transaction value should not have been rejected under Rule 3(3)(a) - the Commissioner (Appeals) has gone beyond the scope of appeal inasmuch as Revenue had merely challenged the manner and the data on the basis of which the declared assessable value has been found correct. Thus, the Commissioner (Appeals) has travelled beyond the scope of dispute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsaction value was accepted by the Deputy Commissioner on the basis of data produced by imposter by using deductive method. The data submitted by importer was not specifically verified applying rule 3(3)(b) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The said order of acceptance of transaction value was reviewed by Revenue on the following grounds:- 7. While examining the deductive value supplied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rejected under Rule 3(3)(a). Revenue is in appeal before Tribunal holding that the order in original had already rejected the value under Rule 3(3)(a) and therefore proceeded to Rule 3(3)(b) for determination of value. The said rejection under Rule 3(3)(a) was not challenge3d by the importer and therefore the rejection under Rule 3(3)(a) becomes final and cannot be reviewed. 3. It has been arg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cture and marketing are deducted, the domestic sale price loosely approximate to CIF price. As such, it is observed that the invoice price is acceptable under Rule 4(3)(b) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 / Rule 3(3)(b) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. 4. It can be seen that the order-in-original essentially relies on similarity in the invoice price with the price arrived of deductive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
