2016 (10) TMI 517

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The brief facts of the case are that the appellant imported polyester knitted fabrics and filed bill of entry declared the transaction value as 2.00 to 2.63 @ USD per kg but the same was assessed to USD 2.85 per kg on the basis of one DRI alert that the overseas suppliers are undervaluing the price of fabrics. The value was enhanced on contemporaneous bill of entry assessed, therefore the value was enhanced of imported fabrics which was challenged by the appellant before the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected their appeal. Aggrieved with the said order, the appellants are before us. 3. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that no notice was given to the appellant, moreover, no speaking order under section 17(5) of the Customs Act,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t that the overseas suppliers are undervaluing the vague of the goods in question, the same cannot be the reason for enhancement of the value without rejecting the transaction value. The Customs Valuation Rules deals with situation how to enhance the value of the imported goods. DRI have not concerned with the said Valuation Rules, therefore, the declared value cannot be enhanced on the basis of DRI alert. 9. In the impugned order, we find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has relied on the assessed value and not the value declared. Rule 5 of the Valuation Rules provide for enchantment of the value is to be done as per said rules. Moreover, the declared vague is found less than the assessed value which cannot be the basis to enhance the va....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tice that no evidence has been fed by the Revenue in the instant case to counter the appellant's contention that the transaction value declared by them, as evident from the documents is not the real transaction value. 6. In view of the above, we are of the considered view that the value of US $ 1100 PMT declared by the appellant has to be accepted as the transaction value. Consequently, the enhancement of the value made by the lower authorities are not sustainable in law. Hence, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any. 10. Further in the case of Samar Polytex Ltd. (supra) again this Tribunal has observed as under: 6. We have carefully considered the submissions. The principles based on which the declared....