TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 96X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isions of Section 110A and 2(1) of the Act would remain confined to laying down the terms at the first instance and the exclusivity of the adjudicating authority to determine that question cannot extend to an appeal proceeding, where the decision of the adjudicating authority can be modified under the aforesaid provision of the statute. Main ground on which this decision is assailed on merit is that it was DRI who had conducted the search and seizure proceeding and without going through their materials on valuation, it was improper on the part of the Tribunal to lay down fresh security terms. We are satisfied that the Tribunal ought to have examined this question in greater detail. Neither the decision of the adjudicating authority nor t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Authority. According to him, this question involves substantial question of law. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel appearing for the parties. The dominant question here is on jurisdiction of the Tribunal to reduce the security terms for provisional release of the goods and the dispute per se is not on valuation of the seized goods. The core issue involved in this appeal is whether the Tribunal has the power or jurisdiction to dilute the terms set by the adjudicating authority for provisional release of goods. As such, we decline to accept the submission of the assessee that the question involves or relates to value of the goods. That dispute is incidental to the main issue. We accordingly admit the appeal on follo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us, we are of the view that unless and until the evidence of the estimated price per piece is submitted to the importer or before the Bench by the Revenue, the appeal could not be taken as for final hearing. 8. The prayer of the appellant is to allow the provisional release of goods and to reduce the bank guarantee bond by the Commissioner. We, therefore, order that bank guarantee shall be reduced to ₹ 20. 00 Lakhs for Bill of Entry No. 3033470 and ₹ 15. 00 Lakhs for Bill of Entry No. 3081944. The Bonds shall be executed for on the full value of the goods. The goods in question shall be released accordingly as per the provisions of the Customs Act. Referring to provisions of Section 110A of the Act, Mr. Ganguli ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to lay down the terms of security. If the assessee or the Revenue is aggrieved by the security terms specified by the adjudicating authority and approaches the Tribunal, if the Tribunal is denuded of the power to test the legality of the security terms, in our opinion, the appeal provision to a large extent would be rendered otiose. Section 129B of the Act empowers the Appellate Tribunal to confirm, modify or annul the decision appealed against. Alteration of terms of security in the manner it has been done in the case of assessee would constitute modification of the decision of the adjudicating authority. When provision for appeal is provided under the Act against a decision of the adjudicating authority, there cannot be an interpretati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he point raised by Mr. Ganguli, we shall now address the decision of the Tribunal on merit. The reasoning of the Tribunal appears from paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of the decision. The Tribunal has held:- 2. In the instant case, the Adjudicating Authority has allowed provisional release of goods in terms of para 11. 1 and para 11. 2 in respect of Bill of entry No. 3033470 dated-29. 08. 2017 and Bill of entry No. 3081944 dated-02. 09. 2017. 3. Ld Advocate has submitted before us that value has been enhanced without providing them the basis on which such enhancement has been done by the adjudicating authority. In the instant case, the value declared was enhanced on the basis of NIDB data obtained from DGOV and they did not dispute it. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|