2015 (12) TMI 54 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Remands Case for Review of Evidence, Emphasizes Fair Opportunity for Both Parties

The Tribunal set aside the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority for reexamination of ... Valuation of goods - Enhancement in value of goods - additions of freight and insurance. - Held that:- It is appropriate that the adjudicating authority should examine evidences such as Chartered Accountant certificate, copies of Bills of Entry of the appellant and unrelated third party, agreements with the same supplier etc for finalization of assessment. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order. Matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority to decide afresh after considering the evidences in accordance with law. At this stage, Ld. AR submitted that along with the questionnaire, Bills of Entry were submitted by the appellant and comparative chart was given by them. We direct the adjudicating authority to consider all these documents. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues involved:1. Enhanced declared value by the adjudicating authority2. Rejection of appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals)3. Failure to consider various evidences by authoritiesIssue 1: Enhanced declared value by the adjudicating authorityThe appellants were engaged in trading goods imported from foreign suppliers. The Special Valuation Branch (SVB) observed a relation between the appellant and the foreign supplier, leading to an enhancement of the declared value by 15.122% along with freight and insurance additions. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this decision, resulting in the appeal.Issue 2: Rejection of appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals)The main contention raised was the failure of both authorities to consider various evidences presented by the appellant, including a Chartered Accountant certificate, Bills of Entry, agreements with the supplier, and a comparative chart. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted the absence of these documents, leading to the rejection of the appeal. However, the appellant later submitted these documents to the Tribunal through a MISC application, arguing that they were presented before the adjudicating authority.Issue 3: Failure to consider various evidences by authoritiesAfter considering submissions from both sides, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate for the adjudicating authority to reexamine the evidences provided by the appellant for the finalization of assessment. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority to make a fresh decision after considering the evidences in accordance with the law. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to review all documents, including Bills of Entry and the comparative chart, emphasizing the need for a proper opportunity of hearing before reaching a decision. The Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, disposing of the stay application and the MISC application for filing additional evidence.This judgment highlights the importance of considering all relevant evidences in assessment proceedings and ensuring a fair opportunity for parties to present their case before a decision is made.