2002 (7) TMI 161 - AT - Customs

Refund claim after enhanced bill-of-entry valuation without speaking order: appeal treated as protest; limitation rejection remanded.

The dominant issue was whether the refund claim was barred by limitation in light of enhancement of assessable value at assessment. The Tribunal held that ... Refund - Limitation - Protest - Whether the enhancement of assessable value of the goods imported by them is justified. - HELD THAT:- It has not been disputed by the Revenue that before assessment of Customs duty, the value has been enhanced on the Bill of Entry and no order has been issued separately. It is well settled law that filing of Appeal is by itself a protest. It is not the case of the Revenue that the Appellant without challenging the assessable value has filed claim for refund of duty said to have been paid in excess. In the present matter before us, apparently no notice was issued and value was enhanced on the Bill of Entry at the time of assessment, which has been challenged by filing the Appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). Thus, the Commissioner (Appeals) is required to consider the Appeal on the aspect of valuation. We therefore, remand the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for afresh decision on the aspect of valuation after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the Appellants. Appeal is thus allowed by way of remand. Issues involved: Whether the enhancement of assessable value of the goods imported by M/s. Bay Shore Glass Trading Pvt. Ltd. is justified.Summary:In the Appeal filed by M/s. Bay Shore Glass Trading Pvt. Ltd., the Appellants imported glass bowls, and the Department enhanced the value of the goods imported by them. The Appellants argued that the value was enhanced arbitrarily without providing an opportunity for submission. They contended that the assessment of the Bill of Entry should be treated as an appealable order. The Appellants paid the duty under oral protest to avoid incurring port charges. They further argued that the value declared was as per the manufacturer's invoice and should be accepted for charging Customs duty. On the other hand, the Departmental Representative emphasized that the Appellants had accepted the enhanced value and paid duty without protest, citing previous Tribunal decisions. After considering both sides, the Tribunal noted that the Appellants had challenged the enhanced value by filing an Appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal found that the Commissioner (Appeals) needed to reconsider the valuation aspect after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the Appellants. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision on the aspect of valuation.The Appeal was allowed by way of remand.