2015 (11) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iption Value (US$) 1. Used and Old GE DXI CT Scanner Machine (Model 2003) 31,000 2. Used and Old GE DXI CT Scanner Machine (Model 2001) 29,000   Total 60,000   The appellant submitted a Chartered Engineers certificate dated 15.03.2010 issued by Mr. Hirose Akira, Japan, according to which the machine manufactured in 2001 was valued at US$ 29,000 and another one manufactured in 2003 was valued at US$ 31,000, which were the values declared by the appellant. The appellant also submitted another inspection report issued by Mr. Ramesh C. Agarwal, Chartered Engineer, Jaipur, who estimated the value of the two machines at US$ 66,000. Revenue obtained the information from the website of 'Dotmed', which ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hartered Engineers certificate was relied upon without offering it opportunity to cross-examine the Chartered Engineer. (iv) The declared value should be accepted and there was no ground available to reject the same. It cited the Supreme Court judgement in the case of Eicher Tractors Vs. Union of India [2000 (122) ELT 321 SC] in support of the said proposition adding that that judgement has been followed by CESTAT like in the case of Metplast IndiaVs. CC, Nhava Sheva [2004 (173) ELT 59 (Tri.-Mum)]. (v) Onus was on Revenue to prove the under-valuation, which has not been discharged. (vi) The website relied upon by the Commissioner is an auction website and the value was often changing. (vii) It was not a case for confiscation or imposition ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....present case, while value can be challenged but such a challenge would be of no avail as with the goods not being available and valuation earlier having been consented, the onus will be on the appellant to establish that the valuation as per his consent suffered from fatal infirmity and such onus has not been discharged. Further, valuation of such goods requires their physical inspection and so re-assessment of value in the absence of goods will not be possible. The case of Eicher Tractors Vs. Union of India (supra) cited by the appellant is not relevant here as in that case there was no evidence that the assessee had consented to enhancement of value. 6. We find that the CESTAT's judgement in the case of Vikas Spinners Vs. CC, Lucknow [....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tested the loaded value at the time when it was done, but not now after having voluntarily accepted the correctness of loaded value of the goods as determined in the presence of their Representative/Special Attorney and paid the duty thereon accordingly."(emphasis added) Similarly, in the case of Guardian Plasticote Ltd. Vs. CC (Port), Kolkotta [2008 (223) ELT 605 (Tri. Kol.)] CESTAT has held as under:- "4. The learned Advocate also cites the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Vikas Spinners v. C.C., Lucknow - 2001 (128) E.L.T. 143 (Tri.-Del.) in support of his arguments. We find that the said decision clearly holds that enhanced value once settled and duty having been paid accordingly without protest, importer is esto....