AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 1196
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Commissioner of Customs, Jaipur. The Order-in-Oiginal inter alia rejects the value of the import goods declared by the importer as Rs. 2,09,29,571.00 and re-determined the same at Rs. 2,73,15,090.00 under section 14(1) of the Customs Act read with Rules 4 and 9 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules (CVR), 2007. 2. The brief facts are that the appellant importer, namely, M/s Golden Agro Corporation imported glass chatons, cutters and pocket scales. 2.1 The revenue issued a show cause notice(SCN) dated 24.08.2012 to the appellants inter alia for enhancement of the values of the goods imported after rejection of their declared values. 2.2 The impugned order inter alia rejected the declared value of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....toms seal no.66, but no mention of seals when samples were subjected to market enquiry and which sealed packet was shown to whom, the collective general opinion has been taken from the petty retailers, and not from wholesalers without mentioning the identity of persons whose evidence is being relied upon, as to their identity etc. the market enquiry reports even for SS7, SS12 states that goods appear to be Chinese origin are not free from doubt and cannot be presumed to be unimpeachable, concrete, reliable piece of evidence so as to reject the transaction value. These opinions are taken with the sole motive and intention of justifying the valuation arrived at the time of seizure and drawl of Panchnama dated 28.02.2012. (iv) Further....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g on record to discard transaction value. (ii) It was even contested before the adjudicating authority and submitted before the adjudicating authority referring to the earlier contemporary import against vide bill of entry No.002027 dated 20.07.2011 at one of the ports under the jurisdiction of same Commissionerate that item pocket scales were cleared at Rs. 68 per piece, whereas in the above bill of entry under dispute, it is declared at Rs. 71 per piece which is still at higher side but no findings were given to discard this transaction value. However, the learned authority has erred and arrived on the conclusions that market enquiry was conducted in the presence of Shri Deepak Agarwal which is without any basis and contrary to facts o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice list (valid from 5th April, 2011) of the Manufacturer has been provided by the importer himself vide letter dated 26.07.2012 and on the basis of Manufacturer's Price List, the prices of the identical goods have been ascertained under sub- rule(1) of Rule 4 of the CVR, 2007. Reliance is placed upon the judgement of Hon'ble Tribunal(Mumbai) in the matter of Commissioner of Customs, Pune Vs Shri Hari Corporaion[2014 (307) E.L.T.771(Tri-Mumbai)]. (b) Unbranded Coloured Glass Chatons As regards these goods, because of the gross mis-declarations of description/grade/ and country of origin etc., the value declared by the importer is not the correct transaction value. Transaction value is liable to be determined under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ich could be legally sustained. The Revenue's main case is mis-declaration of values by the appellant importer in case of following goods: (i) 888 brand glass chatons (ii) Unbranded coloured glass chatons (iii) Pocket scale and cutters 6.1 888 Brand Glass Chatons For this item, the department does not have any contemporary import prices to compare with. Department says that importer produced manufacturer's price list and value has been arrived at after giving 10% discount as proposed in the show cause notice against 30% claimed by the importer appellant. This theoretical exercise of giving 10% discount against claim of 30% by the importer on the manufacturer's price list cannot sustain revenue's case of mis-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ket inquiry. The method of market enquiry for re-determination of the value for these goods is not free from doubt. There is no enquiry made with the experts in the field of subject goods namely Unbranded Coloured Chatons. The Revenue has re-determined the value under rule 9 of CVR 2007 on the basis of market enquiry. However, from the facts it appears that market enquiry was not scientifically conducted and market enquiry in the absence of any corroboratory evidence cannot become sole basis for sustaining the enhancement of value as done by the impugned order. Therefore, the impugned order enhancing the value of these items cannot be legally sustained. 6.3 Pocket Scale & Cutters In the case of these goods, the revenue again enhanced ....