9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 667X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for respondent ORDER Per: S.K. Mohanty Both these appeals are directed against the impugned orders dated 21.12.2009 and 19.3.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Import), JNCH, Raigad. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant had filed Bills of Entry for importation of Ethylene Vinyl Acetate (EVA), claiming classification under CTH 39013000 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , M/s. Texpo had filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court with a prayer to permit them to change the buyer of the goods by amending the Bill of Lading of the transaction in question. The prayer of M/s. Texpo was considered and accordingly, the application was allowed by the Customs Department for amendment in the IGM regarding the change in the name of the consignee from M/s. App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imposed on the appellant under Section 112(a) of the Act. In the impugned order dated 21.12.2009, lower amount of redemption fine was imposed on the ground that the initial importer had already approached the Settlement Commission. 3. The learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the declared value is true transaction value and there is no undervaluation on the part of the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of international trade, but domestic trade and therefore, such price cannot be accepted for determination of the value under Section 14 of the Act. It is an admitted fact on record that pursuant to the order dated 1.12.2008 passed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, the Commissioner of Customs (Import), JNCH had allowed the application filed by M/s. Texpo International for amendment in the IGM rega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red by the overseas supplier should be considered as the transaction value. Therefore, the impugned order, so far as it has rejected the declared value, redetermined the same, ordered for confiscation and imposition of fine and penalty, is not sustainable and the same is liable to be set aside. 6. In view of above discussions, we do not find any merits in the impugned orders. Accordingly, after s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
