Appeals allowed, orders set aside. Revenue can proceed, ensuring natural justice.

The appeals were allowed, and the impugned order and the original assessment order were set aside. The Revenue was permitted to proceed against the appellants in accordance with the law, ensuring compliance with the principles of natural justice by providing the necessary evidence to the appellants.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Valuation of imported goods.
2. Determination of the transaction value.
3. Non-supply of crucial evidence to the appellants.
4. Compliance with principles of natural justice.
5. Legality of the assessment and demand of customs duty.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Valuation of Imported Goods
The appellants imported consignments of "2-4-6 Tricloro 1-3-5 Triazine" from China, declared at US $ 500/- PMT. The goods were provisionally assessed and cleared. A show cause notice was later issued by the Commissioner of Customs, Gujarat, proposing to finalize the Bills of Entry at a value of US $ 1860.00 PMT CIF, recover differential duty, confiscate goods under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962, impose penalties under Section 114A/112(a), and recover interest under Section 28AB.

Issue 2: Determination of the Transaction Value
Section 14 of the Customs Act mandates that the value of imported goods is the price at which such goods are ordinarily sold or offered for sale in the course of international trade. Rule 3(i) of the Customs Valuation (Determination of the Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988, states that the value of imported goods shall be the transaction value, i.e., the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to India, adjusted per Rule 9. If the transaction value cannot be determined, Rule 3(ii) provides for sequential determination through Rules 5 to 8.

Issue 3: Non-Supply of Crucial Evidence to the Appellants
The appellants contended that the computer printout, which formed the basis of the show cause notice, was not supplied to them, denying them the opportunity to verify the alleged comparable transactions. The court noted that the mere existence of a computer printout is not proof of comparable imports, and the appellants must be given a reasonable opportunity to dispute this evidence.

Issue 4: Compliance with Principles of Natural Justice
The court emphasized that the principles of natural justice were violated as the appellants were not provided with the crucial evidence (computer printout) relied upon by the Revenue. This denial of evidence prevented the appellants from challenging the comparability of the transactions.

Issue 5: Legality of the Assessment and Demand of Customs Duty
The court found that the assessment and demand of customs duty based on a higher valuation without supplying the necessary evidence to the appellants were legally unsustainable. The original assessment order and the subsequent orders confirming it were set aside. However, the Revenue was allowed to proceed against the appellants per the show cause notice, provided they comply with the legal requirements and principles of natural justice.

Conclusion:
The appeals were allowed, and the impugned order and the original assessment order were set aside. The Revenue was permitted to proceed against the appellants in accordance with the law, ensuring compliance with the principles of natural justice by providing the necessary evidence to the appellants.

---