9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 510X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y throws a doubt as to the admissibility of such alleged contemporaneous imports and the very basis to treat the same as comparables with the goods in question that were imported. Moreover, the officer has relied on alleged contemporaneous imports which were never put across to the appellant for rebuttal, but however, that such reliance on the contemporaneous imports itself has been doubted by the adjudicating authority when he holds that the value of the imported goods could not be determined under Rule 4 and Rule 5 due to variable factors like numerable types of descriptions, grades, country of origin, etc.; Rules 7 and 8 also could not be applied for want of quantifiable data at the place of exportation and importation respectively. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 19279/2012 dated 16.08.2012. In view of the above, the adjudicating authority, having rejected the value declared by the appellant, proceeded to re-determine the same under Rule 9 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. 3. Aggrieved by such re-determination of import value, the appellant filed an appeal before the first appellate authority, but however, even the first appellate authority vide impugned Order-in-Appeal C.Cus. No. 297/2014 dated 21.02.2014 having upheld the re-valuation as made by the adjudicating authority, the present appeal has been filed before this forum. 4.1 Shri Shravan Kochar, Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant, would submit that the value to be adopted for the purposes of assessment should be the transac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a reference made to contemporaneous imports of allegedly similar goods cleared through Group-4, there are also references made to distinguishing factors like numerable types of descriptions, grades, country of origin, place of exportation and importation, etc. This clearly throws a doubt as to the admissibility of such alleged contemporaneous imports and the very basis to treat the same as comparables with the goods in question that were imported. When there is a reference made to variable factors like numerable types of descriptions, the same could lead to an impression that the item may be falling under CTH 7210 1110, which is the classification declared by the appellant. Further, the appellant claimed that its import was from Belgium and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
