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

.... (SDR), for Revenue   Per: S.S. 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. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the extent of 5% of the enhanced CIF value of 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 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Court dismissed the appeals of the Revenue, where 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 submitt....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....this we find no infirmity in the impugned order by which the value of the imported marble blocks is enhanced. The appeal filed by the importer is dismissed.   8. The Revenue filed the appeal for enhancement of redemption fine and penalty on the ground that the decisions relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals) are not accepted by the Revenue and the reference applications are pending in t....