9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 945X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llegation of undervaluation such as any manipulation in the invoice issued by the appellant from their SEZ unit or there is any flow back of consideration from the buyer of the goods, therefore, in these facts the enhancement of value is baseless and on assumption. Therefore, the department could not establish the case of undervaluation against the appellant. As regard, the redemption fine and penalty imposed on the appellant, it is found that the value declared in the bill of entry as per the invoice since there is no other material adduced by the revenue, no malafide intention can be attributed to the appellant that there was intentionally undervalued the goods. In such case, no fine and penalty can be imposed. The impugned order is not s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Commerce Industry, Government of India, New Delhi, at the time import of goods into the SEZ, the assessment of bill of entry shall be on the basis of the value declared by the SEZ units. However when the goods were cleared in the domestic market, then the assessment of the goods will be as is being done in the case of import of goods for home consumption. However, in this case, the aforesaid instructions have not been followed and goods have been assessed on the basis of NIDB data of 2017 whereas DTA clearance in this case took place in 2018. On this basis, it is submitted that value enhancement being in breach of the Instructions of Government of India, is not tenable in the eyes of law. He further submits that except the reliance of NI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utely no evidence with regard to the allegation of undervaluation such as any manipulation in the invoice issued by the appellant from their SEZ unit or there is any flow back of consideration from the buyer of the goods, therefore, in these facts the enhancement of value is baseless and on assumption. Therefore, we are of the view that the department could not establish the case of undervaluation against the appellant. As regard, the redemption fine and penalty imposed on the appellant, we find that the value declared in the bill of entry as per the invoice since there is no other material adduced by the revenue, no malafide intention can be attributed to the appellant that there was intentionally undervalued the goods. In such case, no fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort the said goods. As Section 111(d) prohibits importing of any restricted or prohibited goods, therefore, the said provisions do not apply to the facts of this case. He further submits that the Section 111(m) of the Act deals with the mis-declaration of the value of the imported goods. In this case, while assessing the goods, the appraiser loaded the value to the tune of 52% on the basis of NIDB data available with them. Therefore, the allegation of mis-declaration of the value is also not sustainable. Accordingly, penalty on the appellant is not warranted. 5 . On the other hand the learned AR appearing for the Revenue drew my intention to the various statements of the appellant as well as co-noticees wherein it has been admitted that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
