AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (5) TMI 684
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 2. As per the facts on records, M/s.Sharu Steels Pvt.Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of alloy and non-alloy steel ingots, rounds bars & flats etc. and are also importing heavy Melting scrap, re-rollable steel scrap and other items of iron and steel. 3. They filed bill of entry dated 23.10.2010 for consignment of light melting steel scrap turning, purchased on high sea sale basis from M/s.RKG International (P) Ltd., New Delhi. The goods were examined and were found to be stainless steel/alloy steel mixed grade whereas the appellant had described light melting steel scrap turning. The value declared by the appellant was USD 365 per MT. 4. The Revenue engaged a Chartered Engineer Shri Anil Kum....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... given to his opinion as he was mechanical engineer and not metrological engineer. Accordingly, he is not a qualified to give opinion. The cross examination of chartered engineer was undertaken where he could not explain the use of Niton X-R-F Analyzer by him and could not explain how chromium, nickel, etc. can be segregated from the goods imported. 7. We note that admittedly the Revenue's case is based on the report given by Shri Anil Kumar Soni only. He has opined as average price of chromium in LME was USD 13500 and that of nickel was USD 27123 in comparison to average price of USD 340. There was no report to suggest how the said ingredients available in the scrap can be segregated. The entire scrap was used for melting processes to o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dence. In the present case, the Revenue has not brought out any evidence on record to show that the same was not reflecting the correct contracted price and extra consideration had flown back from importer to the supplier. In the absence of any such evidence, we are of the view that rejection of transaction value and enhancement of value on the basis of opinion of chartered engineer, who in any case was not an expert in the field and arriving at the value of the consignment, based upon the value of prima quality metal is neither justified nor warranted. 9. We accordingly set aside the impugned order and allow both the appeals with consequential relief. ( Pronounced in the open court on ) Per Devender Singh: 10. Having gone throu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Grades" relevant period under bills of entry Number No. 2166565 dated 06.09.2010 and 2167246 dated 06.09.2010. These bills of entry were provided during cross examination to the advocate for the appellants to check for themselves the valuation of "Turning Scrap of Mix Grades". No further question or rebuttal to the method of CE was made by appellant. 12. I agree with the findings of the Ld. Commissioner (A) that when the goods were mis-declared, the declared value of goods was tainted and also since there was variation in the value declared by the appellant vis-a-vis ascertained that the Chartered Engineer, there was valid reasons to doubt the correctness of value declared by the appellant. The appellant raised a issue that the Chartere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....D., the valuation of the goods can be determined on the basis of opinion of chartered engineer based on cotemporaneous bills of entry of similar scrap and the appeals dismissed, as held by the Member (Technical). PER: ANIL G. SHAKKARWAR 14. Heard on difference of opinion. 15. Heard Shri G.S.Dhillon, learned AR on behalf of Revenue. He has submitted that MD of the firm agreed with the description of the imported goods given by Chartered Engineer Shri Anil Kumar Soni. He has further submitted that the MD of the importer had disputed the value shown in the report given by said chartered engineer. The learned AR submitted that the said chartered engineer was empanelled by the Principal Commissioner through Public Notice No.27/Cus/2015 ....