9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent. ORDER Heard Mr. Joseph Prabakar, the Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. A.P. Srinivas, the Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent. 2. The petitioner has challenged the order-in-original passed by the respondent, dated 28-11-2011, which admittedly, is an appealable order, as Appeal lies to the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai. Therefore, the Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at values of the imported goods by the petitioner, the corresponding values may be taken as basis and it may be loaded by 250%. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an Appeal before Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), who, by order, dated 12-9-2005, rejected the petitioner's Appeal and confirmed the order-in-original of the Joint Commissioner of Customs, SVB. As against the same, the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the petitioner. The Revenue preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who, by order-in-appeal, dated 20-5-2009, held that the matter requires re-consideration, and accordingly, set aside the order-in-original, dated 25-8-2006 and remanded the matter to the respondent for fresh consideration. 3.2 On such remand, what was expected of the respondent was to consider the matter fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that, made an observation that, the issue relating to violation of principles of natural justice was not noticed by the Commissioner (Appeals) while rejecting the Appeal, by order, dated 12-9-2005. 4. Therefore, the respondent herein could not have relied on and even referred to the order, dated 29-12-2004, but what was expected of him was to take an independent decision in the matter based ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
