Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether enhancement of assessable value could be sustained merely because the importer cleared the goods at the enhanced value, and whether the importer was entitled to contest the enhancement in the absence of a speaking order.
Analysis: The circular relied upon required the proper officer to intimate in writing the grounds for doubting the declared value and to afford a reasonable opportunity before taking a final decision. It contemplated dispensation with a speaking order only where enhancement was accepted by both sides. Clearance of goods at the enhanced value to avoid demurrage or for similar practical reasons did not, by itself, amount to consent to the enhancement. The importer retained the right to challenge the assessment and the absence of reasons by the assessing authority justified interference and remand for a fresh decision in accordance with natural justice.
Conclusion: The objection of Revenue was rejected and the importer's challenge to the enhancement remained open; the remand to the original authority was upheld.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed, and the assessment was required to be reconsidered by the original authority after following due process.
Ratio Decidendi: Mere clearance of goods at an enhanced value does not amount to consent to the enhancement, and the importer's right to contest the assessment survives unless the enhancement is accepted after being duly informed and heard.