9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 624X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s for which the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Star Entertainment Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication) [2015 (329) ELT 50 (Bom.)] had been cited in support. Narrating the background, Learned Counsel for applicants informs that demand in the proceedings pertained to imports against a bill of entry that did not require invoking of the extended period in section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 despite which the order of the Tribunal, now sought to be rectified, did held that '11. The claim of the appellant for not invoking the extended period does not find much favour and the reliance placed on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in re Star Entertainment Pvt Ltd which noted the decision of the Hon'ble Su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tual position, the CEGAT has held that no plea was taken about there being no intention to evade payment of duty as the same was to be reimbursed by the buyer. In fact such a plea was clearly taken. The factual scenario clearly goes to show that there was scope for entertaining doubt, and taking a particular stand which rules out application of Section 11A of the Act.' would not apply to the present set of facts and circumstances which are materially different.' after recording that '6. It is also argued that the rates were negotiated and contracted thereby attaining finality as transaction value for the contents and the material as imported. They also claimed the bar to invoke of extended period as the matter was beyond the realm of ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal. We have upheld the liability to confiscation but set aside the redemption fine on the ground of non-availability of goods. The enhancement is not one of rejection of declared value with consequent reliance on contemporaneous import of identical or similar goods or by recourse to best judgment. The substituting mechanics in the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 notwithstanding, and which are not the substance of the dispute here, the mandate of certain inclusions are also embodied therein. It was, therefore, the responsibility of the importer to include these, and by having failed so to do, rendered the goods liable to confiscation. In these circumstances, the order of the Tribunal has not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es making of an incorrect statement with the knowledge that the statement was not correct. 11. Factual position goes to show the Revenue relied on the circular dated 23-5-1997 and dated 19-12- 1997. The circular dated 6-1-1998 is the one on which appellant places reliance. Undisputedly, CEGAT in Continental Foundation Joint Venture case (supra) was held to be not correct in a subsequent larger Bench judgment. It is, therefore, clear that there was scope for entertaining doubt about the view to be taken. The Tribunal apparently has not considered these aspects correctly. Contrary to the factual position, the CEGAT has held that no plea was taken about there being no intention to evade payment of duty as the same was to be reimbursed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
