9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1190X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g a fresh order. The relevant documents shall be provided to the appellant within three weeks from today. The appellant shall file a reply within three weeks thereafter and the adjudicating authority shall pass a reasoned order within three weeks thereafter - Appeal allowed by way of remand. - Customs Appeal No. 51435 of 2019 - FINAL ORDER NO. 51067/2021 - Dated:- 3-3-2021 - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA, PRESIDENT AND HON BLE MR. P V SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri V. S. Negi, Advocates for the Appellant Shri Sunils Kumar, Authorised Representative for the Department ORDER P V SUBBA RAO This appeal is filed assailing the order-in-appeal No. CC(A) CUS/D-II/PREV/NCH/3596/2018-19 dated 27.02.2019 passed by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the learned adjudicating authority in a single paragraph as below: All the judgments relied upon by the Advocate of Noticee in his written reply of the show cause notice regarding valuation of goods are different from this case. In this case noticee had imported different Chinese brand laptop panels of different sizes by mis-declaring as unbranded and declared lower value. NIDB data of contemporaneous import of same Chinese Brands, size, model, make and specification found value on higher side than declared by the noticee in their bills of entries. This fact had not denied by the noticee in his different statements recorded under section 108 of Customs Act, 1962. 4. Aggrieved, the appellant appealed to the first appellate authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le reason to interfere with the order of the original authority and, accordingly rejected the appeal. 6. Learned Counsel submits that it was incorrect for the Adjudicating authority to say that they had not attended personal hearing on any date. In fact, they had attended the hearings on 15.01.2015 and 23.01.2015 and requested for some documents including the past bills of entry and instead of supplying them, the case was posted for repeated hearing. Therefore, they had submitted only an interim reply and they could not make final submissions as the required documents were not given to them. The submissions which they had made in their interim reply were also dismissed by the adjudicating authority in one paragraph (reproduced above) wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry cryptic order but even otherwise opportunity was not provided to the appellant to file a detailed reply. The appellant had expressed inability to file a detailed reply because the documents, on the basis of which the declared value indicated in the 14 bills of entry was rejected, was not provided. It is, therefore, a fit care case which should be recommended to the adjudicating authority for passing a fresh order. 11. The relevant documents shall be provided to the appellant within three weeks from today. The appellant shall file a reply within three weeks thereafter and the adjudicating authority shall pass a reasoned order within three weeks thereafter. 12. The impugned order is, accordingly, set aside and the appeal is allowed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
