9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n - Thus it is clear that orders have been passed without considering the defence submissions and hence is in violation of principle of natural justice, which clearly state audi alteram partem i.e. nobody should be condemned unheard . The matter needs to be remanded back to the concerned adjudicating authority for reconsideration - Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Customs Appeal No. 800 of 2007 - A/86988/2019 - Dated:- 13-8-2019 - Hon ble Dr. D.M. Misra, Member (Judicial) And Hon ble Mr. Sanjiv Srivastava, Member (Technical) Shri Rakesh Jain, Advocate, for the Appellant Shri Manoj Kumar, Assistant Commissioner, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on the available information on records. 3. If the Appraising Groups come across with any evidence relating to the contemporaneous import of identical or similar goods, the same may be brought to the notice of Special Valuation Branch for suitable revision of this order. 4. All the pending provisional assessments may be finalized on the above basis. 5. The present communication is issued based on the available facts and declaration made by the importer. However if there is any change in the method of invoicing in terms of relationship or any other material facts that would affect the valuation of the imported gods under the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 read with section 14 of the Cus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ased it from the manufacturer, M/s Excel machine Tools Ltd Singapore, M/s Excel machine had sold this item for US$ 55,000/- to TPI Singapore who has billed the same for amount of US$ 55,000/- to the present importer. The emergence of these facts and circumstances re-inforces the grain of doubt in the mind leading to the inference of value influence by the relationship between the supplier and the importer. There is a joint venture of 50:50 between the supplier and the imports, thus the influence between related persons/ establishments had not been scored out completely. Even now in Appeal the appellant have not submitted any evidence to controvert the findings of the original authority. In the circumstances, the adjudication order is held t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The allegations, as made by the competent authorities that they did not cooperated and or not submitted the documents and have tendered incorrect/ false information are no correct as the document referred to by these authorities is first stage of reply signed by one of their junior executive. Apart from the said error, they had fully cooperated and submitted all the relevant information to the adjudicating authority. Personal hearing was also attended by them. They had submitted al the remaining information vide their letter TPH/06-7/52 dated 11.01.2007 received by the adjudicating authority on 18/19.01.2007. By that time order was passed ex parte. They have nothing to conceal, and it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e said circumstances the declared invoice value of the goods imported b the said importer from foreign supplier cannot be accepted on account of proviso (d) to Rule 4(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. 6 The said importer has also not given any documentary evidence to substantiate that the said relationship between the Importer and the supplier has not influenced the declared Invoice price as required under Rule 4(3)(a) an (b) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 198. 7 For want of the requisite data in the available records, the value of the imports of Importer from the said supplier can also not be determined under Rule 5 to Rule 7(a) of Custom Valuation Rules, 1988. 8 In spite of cle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without considering the defence submissions and hence is in violation of principle of natural justice, which clearly state audi alteram partem i.e. nobody should be condemned unheard . 4.4 Hence the matter needs to be remanded back to the concerned adjudicating authority for reconsideration. While deciding the matter in remand proceedings he should allow the party to produce all the defence submissions and after consideration of the same decide the matter afresh by a speaking order. 5.1 In view of the discussion as above we allow the appeal filed and remand the matter for fresh consideration by the adjudicating authority. 5.2 Since the matter is quite old, appellants should fully cooperate wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
