2017 (9) TMI 1142

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... They have been regularly importing iron and steel scrap to be used as input in their manufacture. The dispute in the present appeals relates to valuation of such imports made by the appellants. The appeals deal with bills of entry, which were subject matter of four impugned orders. At the time of import, the appellant filed bills of entry declaring an assessable value ranging from US$199 to 258 PMT. The imports were made from September, 2015 to May, 2016. The assessing officer raised a query to justify the valuation declared by the appellant and also intimated the importers that bills of entry will be re-assessed based on contemporaneous price available with the assessing officer. The assessments were accordingly carried out by enhancing t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ised, the appellants have provided all the relied documents. No discussion on documents have been recorded by the lower authorities. Instead they have straight away stated a comparable value purported to be with reference to contemporaneous import; (e) No comparable value can automatically substitute transaction value and there is no evidence that any other consideration other than one mentioned in the invoice has formed part of the transaction; (f) NIBD data is a reference value for the assessing officers and cannot be automatically adopted for enhancing value. The assessable value is governed by legal provisions of Section 14 and Valuation Rules. Reliance was placed on certain decided cases. 3. Ld. AR submitted that the assessing....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e range of 11 to 15%. The exact nature of goods and the details of contracts of the contemporaneous consignments were not available, only basic description and quantity of the imported items were available, which were compared. 6. In this connection, we have perused the provisions of Rule 12, which enables the rejection of declared assessable value. The said rules provide for proper officer seeking clarification from the importer to provide further information to satisfy the correctness of the declared assessable value. In the present case, the appellants did submit the invoice, purchase order and supporting contract documents with reference to the impugned consignments. Nothing more is required with the importer to further substantiate ....