TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 455
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Shri Sunil kumar, ld. AR on behalf of the Revenue as well as Shri Sagar Rastogai, ld. Advocate on behalf of the respondent.-assessee 3. After hearing both sides for some time, we find that the appeal itself is taken up for a decision with the concurrence of both the sides. 4. The respondent imported certain goods and filed Bill of Entry No. 2998587 dated 28.8.2017 at ICD, TKD, New Delhi. The imported goods included mobile accessories such as ear plug, data cable etc. electronic items; PVC table covers etc. The Customs duty on the imported goods was paid by the respondent on the basis of self-assessment of duty on the transaction value. The Customs authorities held that the transaction value declared by the respondent was low and propose....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtment was not required to pass speaking order in terms of sub-section 5 of Section 17 in cases where the importer confirms his acceptance of the said reassessment in writing. He further contented that if the enhancement was not accepted by the importer, the due process of re-assessment in terms of Customs Valuation Rules would have been followed and speaking order would have been issued. (ii) The ld. DR further submitted that once the value has been accepted by the importer there is no need for the Customs authorities to prove such enhanced value. In this regard, he relied on the decision of Tribunal in case of CC (Import) Vs. Sodagar Knitwear -2018 (362) ELT 819 (Tri.-Del.). The said decision has been approved by Hon'ble Supreme Court an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as not justified and supported the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). (ii) In this connection., the ld. Advocate also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Laxmi Colour Lab Vs. CC -1992 (62) ELT 617 (Tribunal). The said decision also has been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and reported in 1997 (90) ELT A183. In the said decision importer accepted the enhanced value fixed by the department due to urgency to clear the goods, but challenged the enhancement by way of appeal. He also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of CCE Vs. Hingora Industries Ltd. - 2009 (237) ELT 318 wherein it has been observed that there is no estoppel in law. 8. Heard both sides and perused the record. 9. The dispute in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es makes it abundantly clear that transaction value in the ordinary course of commerce is to be taken as the assessable value. The Customs Valuation Rules outlines the step by step methodology to be adopted for re-determination of the assessable value in certain cases. The primary requirement for re-determination of the value is that the transaction value should be rejected for cogent reasons prescribed in the Customs Valuation Rules. If the transaction value is rejected, then the Customs Valuation Rules prescribes the basis for arriving at the assessable value. 12. Perusal of the records of the case indicates that the only reason cited reason for re-assessment of value is that the respondent has accepted the enhanced value. No doubt accep....