TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (6) TMI 914
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dia, and with a view to penetrate the market, the price of the items imported was negotiated and imports were made. The invoices which were raised by the foreign supplier were for the amount, which was negotiated and agreed upon between the two parties. The prices agreed accordingly were mutually negotiated for the purpose of market penetration, which resulted in offering higher discounts to the normally offered in the pricelist/quotation of the foreign supplier. On an investigation which was done by the DRI, 53 consignments imported by the appellant were investigated. The said 53 consignments were already allowed and cleared, as per the value declared in the relevant Bills of Entry. After an investigation by the lower authorities and recor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Section 28AB of the Customs Act, 1962. He also imposed equivalent penalty of Rs. 72,91,775/- under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. A further penalty of Rs. 10,00,000/- was also imposed on the partner i.e., Shri Anthony Thomas under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved by such an order, the appellants are before us in these appeals. 3. Learned Counsel Shri Parameshwaran along with advocate Shri Balagopal appeared on behalf of the appellants. The learned counsel took us through the Order-in-Original and the entire show cause notice. Ld. Counsel mainly argued that the entire order is based upon the statement of Shri Antony. He draws our attention to that portion of the statement which was given by Mr. Anthony wherein it in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y other invoice has been found during the investigation. It is his submission that in any case, the statement and other evidences relied upon could at best be considered as tax planning and certainly not as tax evasion, which would get further established by the tact that every year the price of the items has been increasing and during the year 2006, it had reached a stage of offering normal discounts in terms of the said pricelist/quotation. It was his submission that the whole basis adopted for alleging undervaluation seems to be totally misconceived. It is also his submission that department has not produced any evidence of contemporaneous imports. On the contrary, it is his submission that appellant had placed on record contemporaneous ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ained to M/s. Talwar Agencies Pvt. Ltd; and M/s. KP International against whom also an investigation was launched by DRI and they have settled the matter before the Settlement Commission. As regards the other evidences, it is his submission that the evidences were very clear in this case. He would submit that the managing partner has clearly given a statement saying that for the purpose of customs duty, they have agreed for the 50% of the negotiated price to be mentioned on the invoices. 5. We have considered the submissions made in detail by both sides and perused the records. The entire case is regarding the undervaluation of 53 consignments of 'opal glassware' imported by the appellant. The details of the imports are given in the show....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tement cannot be relied upon wherein there is a categorical admission that transaction value will be increased in subsequent consignments. In this case, the finding of the Adjudicating Authority is that re-determination can be done under Rule 5 to 8, occurs only in cases when the actual transaction value cannot be ascertained correctly on the basis of the documents submitted. It is also noticed that in this case, the submissions made by the appellant before the learned Adjudicating Authority, as regards the amount of remittances made by them is exactly the same which is mentioned in the invoices, which were annexed along with the 53 bills of entries. This part of the evidence has not been appreciated by the learned Adjudicating Authority no....