9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 435X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spects are critical to such rejection: requiring such evidence to be furnished by importer as is necessary for acceptance of declared value as transaction value and, should the declared value be discarded, adoption of such value as is validated by the sequential alternatives in the Rules. There is nothing on record to demonstrate that the necessary pre-requisite in rule 12 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 had been set in motion; indeed, the entire process, commencing with failure to issue notice of intent and culminating in refusal to issue speaking order, appears to be devoid of any cognition of the principles of natural justice. Even though the principles of natural justice stand breached by both ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the re-valuation. 3. It was further submitted that the disposal by the first appellate authority was no less tardy inasmuch as reliance was placed, and ostensibly on furnishment by the assessing group, on the value in bill of entry no. 782991/13.02.09 which was not brought on record for validation as 'contemporaneous' import of identical or similar goods. Citing the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Basant Industries v. Addl Collector of Customs, Bombay [1996 (81) ELT 195 (SC)] and of the Tribunal in Devika Trading Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai [2004 (167) ELT 75 (Tri-Mumbai)] and in Spices Trading Corporation v. Commissioner of Customs, Madras [1998 (104) ELT 656 (Tribunal)], it was contended the a stray invoice was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t have been called into question on the foundation of a stray bill of entry alone without further investigation and evidence. 5. As pointed out by Learned Counsel, the Tribunal, in a catena of decisions, viz., in Orion Systems v. Commissioner of Customs, Cochin [2005 (192) ELT 1117 (Tri-Bang)] and in Narayan International v. Collector of Customs [1992 (58) ELT 126 (Tribunal)], both affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as well as in Dujodwala Products Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai [2009 (235) ELT 266 (Tri-Mumbai)] has held that, for reliance on evidence of transaction value of contemporaneous imports, the relevant assessment material should have been furnished and congruency with the disputed imports established. Failure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isite in rule 12 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 had been set in motion; indeed, the entire process, commencing with failure to issue notice of intent and culminating in refusal to issue speaking order, appears to be devoid of any cognition of the principles of natural justice. Furthermore, resort to rule 5 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 should have established that the similar goods contemporaneously imported had been priced so at the time of its import. There is a glaring lack of details that impacts credibility to adoption of the assessable value in bill of entry no. 782992/13.02.09 even though the description therein may correspond to that in the bi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
