2023 (11) TMI 971

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ant (s) Shri S.Debnath, Authorized Representative for the Revenue ORDER Per : ASHOK JINDAL : The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the value of the goods imported has been enhanced. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant filed four Bills of Entry dated 26.03.2014 declaring the goods as "Mulberry Raw Silk in hanks 20/22 D 3A grade and above" and declared th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... $ 38 per Kg.. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before us. 4. The Ld.Counsel for the appellant submits that the adjudicating authority has relied on the imports at Chennai Port during the same period, but it is not described whether those goods are identical or similar goods. Further, prior to import of these impugned goods within six months, the goods have been cleared at a value .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 7. In that circumstances, we do not accept the value enhanced by the adjudicating authority in the absence of any other supporting evidence. In that circumstances, we set aside the impugned order and hold the value declared by the appellant as the correct value of the impugned imported goods. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential relief, if any. ( Oper .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X