2014 (10) TMI 842

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dvocate, for the Appellant. Shri Govind Krishna Dixit, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER The present impugned order stands passed by the Commissioner in de novo proceedings when the matter was earlier remanded by the original adjudicating authority. 2. The Commissioner has arrived at a finding of misdeclaration of the goods and consequently, misdeclaration of the value. Accordingly, h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ue, further adjustments have to be made as regards the commercial quantities, interpretative notes to Rule 4. As such, he submits that there was a contemporaneous price of Rs. 1219.32. The Commissioner should have adopted the said price for the assessable value, even though the quantities in the said bills of entries were only 720 pieces as against 2880 pieces imported by the appellant. He subm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ls of entry was justified. However, he fairly agrees that number of pieces in the said bill of entry was 720 pieces as against 2880 pieces imported by the appellant. As regards the redemption fine, ld. Advocate fairly agrees that the Commissioner has not gone to the margin of profit and has roughly decided the redemption fine based upon the duty evaded by the assessee. 5. The only grievanc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....facts of the present case, we note that the Commissioner has adopted the value as Rs. 13,82 per piece (sic) based upon a bill of entry where the quantity imported was 720 pieces. From the DOV Data Chart produced before us, we note that the value for the import of 360 pieces was Rs. 1418.35. This fact shows that the value changes with the quantity of the goods ordered and imported. In the present c....