Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1995 (5) TMI 157

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y imposed on the applicants as also the differential duty, is rather too harsh inasmuch as the differential duty has been arrived at on the basis of an arbitrarily high value fixed under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 by the Adjudicating Authority. 2. Learned Advocate for the applicant Company in support of his submission that the price has been arbitrarily fixed, has taken us through a lot of evidence on record. He has also contended that the evidence which has been relied upon by the Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order was not at all disclosed in the show cause notice or in the course of proceedings. In support of that contention he points out the following instances :- (vide para : 7(i), (ii), (iii), (vi), (vii) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to the aforesaid. (ix) At page 40 of the order the Collector has alleged that the value of the bearings imported by the appellant workes out to Rs. 5.61 and 5.31 per kg. Nothing has been mentioned as to how these figures have been arrived at. There was only one import under one invoice and obviously there could not have been two different average values on per Kg. basis. Not only this, in the show cause notice (page 89) the said figure was mentioned at Rs. 3.65 per kg. This would also show that there has been a complete non-application of mind on the part of the Collector." 3. He, therefore, submits that there has been a gross violation of principles of natural justice. 4. Apart from the foregoing, ld. Advocate has als....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... cross-examine Shri C.K. Vora of Nippon Machineries & Bearings of Bombay relating to the goods of IB brand itself the price of which had been relied upon. But the Adjudicating Authority is silent on their request. 6. We have also heard the learned Senior [Departmental Representative], Shri D.K. Saha for the Revenue. 7. After giving our careful consideration to the pleas of both sides, we are satisfied that there has been a gross violation of principles of natural justice on various counts as mentioned by the learned Advocate. Therefore, while allowing the Stay Petition unconditionally we remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority with the following terms :- (i) If the Adjudicating Authority relies on any evidence not....