TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (5) TMI 846
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n Pahwa, Advocate Mr. Kuldeep Singh, Advocate Present for the Respondent: Mr.G.R. Singh, D.R. ORDER PER: S.K. MOHANTY These appeals are directed against the impugned order dated 13.11.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant herein, M/s. I. Dector India Pvt. Ltd. had filed bill of entry dated 11.04.2016 for clearance o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the appellant company. 3. Feeling aggrieved with the order dated 21.06.2016, the appellant had preferred appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals,) which was disposed of by order dated 21.10.2016, in remanding the matter to the original authority for conducting the market enquiry and for determination of the value. Pursuant to the remand direction of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), the orig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order dated 13.11.2017, in upholding the adjudged demand against the appellants. 4. The ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that based on the invoice dated 17.02.2016, the appellant had filed the bill of entry and declared the value of the goods as per the said invoice. He further submits that in respect of the invoice value of 14,000 USD, the appellant had paid 2,500 USD on 02.11.2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t be sustained. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings recorded in the impugned order. He further submits that since based on the order dated 21.10.2016 of the Commissioner (Appeals), the Department has conducted the market enquiry and determined the value, which the appellant had accepted as true and correct, the adjudged demand confirmed against the a....