TaxTMI Login
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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) could admit and rely on fresh evidence produced for the first time at the appellate stage without satisfying the conditions for additional evidence under Rule 5 of the Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982 and without affording the adjudicating authority an opportunity to examine or rebut it.
Analysis: The appellate authority had relied upon a new invoice and other material that had not been produced before the original adjudicating authority. Rule 5 of the Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982 permits additional evidence only in specified circumstances, requires reasons to be recorded for its admission, and further mandates that the adjudicating authority be given a reasonable opportunity to examine the evidence or produce rebuttal evidence. Those requirements were not shown to have been complied with. Since the original valuation order had proceeded on the material available before the assessing officer, the fresh evidence could not have been straightaway acted upon at the appellate stage.
Conclusion: The admission of fresh evidence by the Commissioner (Appeals) was not sustainable, and the matter had to be sent back to the original adjudicating authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law. The appeal succeeded and the remand was ordered in favour of the Revenue.
TaxTMI 
