TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (6) TMI 552
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e directive given in Board's Circular No. 1/98, dated 1-1-1998 followed by Circular No. 11/2001, dated 23-2-2001 the Commissioner (Appeals) should have followed the view taken by the Deputy Commissioner, SVB, Mumbai in his Order dated 11-1-2000. 2. The appellants are engaged in the business of undertaking projects for high quality building automation systems, automatic temperature controls, fire alarm systems and security and access control for office etc. They have their registered office in Mumbai with branches at New Delhi, Calcutta, Hyderabad and Bangalore. The appellants are a wholly owned subsidiary of M/s. Johnson Controls International B.V. Netherlands (JCIBV). JCIBV is a subsidiary of Johnson Controls Inc. United States of Am....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... their import is through Mumbai. The Customs authorities in Mumbai referred the case to their respective SVB in April 1999. The appellants submitted their reply to the SVB questionnaire under letter dated 17-4-2000. Finally after verification of evidence on record and adjudication SVB Mumbai accepted the declared transaction value under order dated 11-9-2000 passed by Deputy Commissioner, SVB. 5. While so the appellants received order in original No. 35/99/ACD, dated 7-1-2000 passed by Deputy Commissioner, SVB, Delhi wherein on the basis of an ex parte assessment a loading of 20% was directed on all imports from JC Singapore. It is the case of the appellant that it had not received neither the show cause notice issued by SVB Delhi nor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....horities. 7. The learned DR, on the other hand, would contend that there is no justification on the part of the appellants for concealing order dated 7-1-2000 from SVB Mumbai when proceedings were going on in Mumbai. The Deputy Commissioner, SVB cannot be found fault with as the appellants had failed to produce any material before him in answer to the query. 8. In the Circular No. 1/98, dated 1-1-1998 Board gives certain instructions regarding the procedure to be followed in the various Custom Houses in regard to cases taken up by SVB of the Custom Houses. Sub-clause (1) of Clause 2 reads as follows :- "2. On the basis of this review, the Board has taken the following decisions:- (i)  The 'Special Valuation Branch' (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellants' head office is at Mumbai and that its major import is also at Mumbai. As mentioned earlier, the appellants had not replied to the show cause notice nor had appeared in person for hearing before the Deputy Commissioner. It is the case of the appellants that they have never received the show cause notice or notice for personal hearing. No attempt is being made either in the order-in-original or in the appellate order to establish that the above stand taken by the assessee was false. On going through the order dated 7-1-2000 we find that the Deputy Commissioner has not given any reason to make a loading of 20%. Since no reply was received from the appellants to show cause notice it seems that no further investigation was also made. ....