9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 1331X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from record of proceedings before the lower authority that the contents of the report had not been disputed. Learned Counsel contended that values of earlier imports are clearly ascertainable. However, no details were furnished - It would only be appropriate for such evidence to be furnished and for the adjudicating authority to cause verification of prices at which these were actually sold - it is directed that fresh adjudication to be made. The matter is remanded to the original authority for re-determination on the facts pertaining to earlier imports to be furnished by the appellant. - MR C J MATHEW, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) AND MR AJAY SHARMA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Anand Sachwani, Advocate for the appellant Shri Ashwini ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stoms Act, 1962 even as the live consignment, upon confiscation under section 111(m) of Customs Act, 1962, was permitted to be redeemed under section 125 of Customs Act, 1962 on payment of fine of ₹ 15,00,000. These, along with penalty of ₹ 4,50,000 under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 and of ₹ 10,00,000 under section 114AA of Customs Act, 1962, are under challenge in this appeal. 2. The impugned goods, said to have been manufactured by M/s Shantou Jiadili Cosmetics Co Ltd, China, despite having been imported over different periods in time were subjected to the same treatment in the impugned order following a market survey by officers of customs and justified by 7.1 In situations such as this, one needs to be gu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... termination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 sequentially was contested by him with reference to the decision of the Tribunal in Dohler India Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs, Pune [2017 (357) ELT 1129 (Tri-Mumbai)] and recourse to rule 12 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 by reference to Sumeet Exports (India) v. Commissioner of Customs (I), Nhava Sheva [2019 (370) ELT 423 (Tri-Mumbai)]. He submitted that in Kuber India v. Commissioner of Customs, Jaipur-I [2016 (340) ELT 404 (Tri-Del)], it had been held by the Tribunal that prices obtained from internet was no substitute for the requirements enumerated in Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007. 4. We h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by. Thence to proceed to deductive value should not have been impossible. Instead, the residual method has been invoked which is inconsistent with the decision of the Tribunal, in re Dohler India Pvt Ltd, holding that 6. It is seen from the above decisions that the assessing authority is required, in the first place, to assign cogent reasons for disallowance of the declared value, for the purposes of computation of customs duty, by resort to Rule 10A(1) of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988. This we find to be lacking except for an observation that there appeared to be a contemporaneous import at a different port at a higher price. In this context, we find that the reliance placed upon the deci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
