TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (1) TMI 384
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Nair, D.N. Panda, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : S/Shri R.K. Chaudhury, Advocate assisted by B.N. Pal, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A. Hore, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)]. - Heard both sides and perused the record. 2. The applicant, M/s. Anuj International Private Ltd., Kolkata filed shipping bills and produced a consignment of 100% cotton-knitted T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat "present market value" is not more than Rs. 35/- per piece''. During investigation, the supplier of the goods also stated that the market value would be around Rs. 50/- per piece. Based on these and other evidence, the Customs Authorities issued a show cause notice alleging misdeclaration of value with intent to claim drawback in excess of what is due. 4. The applicant did not reply to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Tribunal has held in the case of Peerless Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C. (Port), Kolkata reported in 2002 (143) E.L.T. 176 (Tri.-Kolkata), that "present market value" is not to be determined based on cost of production. There is also a submission that since the goods have already been exported and value realized, proceedings are not warranted. 6. We are not able to accept the con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the consignment becomes liable to confiscation. It is also well-settled that realization of payment from abroad is irrelevant to the question of overvaluation. 7. In the above factual and legal situation, we do not find this to be a fit case for granting waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty imposed on the applicant/exporter, M/s. Anuj International. They are, therefore, directed to make ....