2001 (11) TMI 841

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t. SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J) (Oral)]. -  This appeal arises from Order-in-Original No. 30/99, dated 8-4-99 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Airport), Custom House, Calcutta ordering for confiscation of goods valued at Rs. 12,79,377.40 CIF under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act'62 since it was deemed to have been mis-declared, however, granti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....inted out that the goods which are described in the invoice dated 28-12-98 of Sikkim Jewels Ltd., was imported from China and they were not comparable goods. He contended that it was against the principles of valuation to compare the goods which were not of same country of origin, time, quality and quantity. He also contended that appellants had given expert opinion to show that the items were dif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8) E.L.T. 537 (Cal.); Spices Trading Corporation v. Commissioner - 1998 (104) E.L.T. 665 (T); Vintel Distributors Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner - Final Order No. 1449/2001, dated 21-8-2001 [2002 (149) E.L.T. 145 (Tribunal)]. He contended that as the goods were not comparable and therefore the order is required to be set aside by allowing the appeal. 4. Ld. SDR, pointed out that in view of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., the second item of the said invoice declared as Synthetic Ruby Cracle was, however, found to be somewhat inferior quality to the goods of M/s. Sikkim Jewels Ltd. If this be the position, then it is clear that the goods are not of comparable in nature. However, as the order itself is not a speaking order and not legal and proper, we are of the considered opinion that the matter has to go back to ....