2011 (5) TMI 606

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Kang   Heard both sides.   2. The importer as well as the Revenue filed appeals against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).   3. The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Super Tiles & Marble Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as importer ) made import of raw/rough marble blocks from Italy as well as from Turkey. The import of rough marble blocks is restrict....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the goods.   4. The importer filed appeal challenging the enhancement of the value in case of marble blocks imported from Turkey. The contention is that marble blocks were imported from Turkey and the other importers the value declared even less than the value declared by the importer is accepted by the Revenue. The Revenue is relying upon the imports made during the period 2001 to 2002 in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e the redemption fine and penalty were imposed 20% and 5% of the CIF value.   6. The Revenue submitted that the appellant had not produced bill of entry in support of their claim. They only produced two invoices which are on record and it is not clear whether the invoice value is accepted by the assessing authority or not. It is also submitted that the same quality of marble was being import....