TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 1078
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... substantive grounds of appeal:- "1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred while considering the Remand Report submitted by the Assessing Officer. 2. The Ld. C1T(A) itself has claimed the non-availability of the Remand Report while deciding the case. 3. Whether it is the fit case to restore the file back to the Ld. C1T(A) for fresh adjudication on the basis of the facts of the case and conclusion recorded by the C1T(A) while deciding the case. 4. The assessee has failed to reconcile the item-wise purchases made while under assessment before the Assessing Officer. 5. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. C1T(A) is right in deleting the addition of Rs. 8,74,08,069/-. 6.1 Whether C1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t order dated 04/12/2017, the assessee has preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) vide order dated 17/07/2019 allowed the appeal filed by the assessee by deleting the addition made by the A.O. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A) dated 17/07/2019 the Department of Revenue has preferred the present appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 6. The Ld. DR has vehemently contended that the Ld.CIT(A) has erred while considering the remand report submitted by the Assessing Officer, wherein the Ld.CIT(A) himself claimed the non-availability of remand report while deciding the case. Further submitted that, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred when the assessee has failed to produced the invoice value of the total figure in question before....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e value. They have fixed bench mark to impose custom duty by taking all imported stock lot of plastic rolls @ 850$ PMT irrespective of our purchase price weather it is 10$ or 849$. This creates a huge difference in our purchase value and value given by CBEC." 10. The above said clarification given by the assessee has not been accepted by the Ld. A.O. and made the addition. It is to be noted that subsequent year i.e. Assessment Year 2016-17 was also scrutinized on the same issue and was accepted on returned income. Besides the same, the Ld.CIT(A) has called for the remand report of the A.O. to verify the comment on purchase value invoice value and accessible value of the goods imported during the relevant period. The relevant extract of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Difference of assessment value and invoice value of imports Rs.8,74,08,069.28/-. Assessable value of goods in transits = Rs.30,46,095/-. Difference after considering goods in transits = Rs.8,43,61,974.28/-. Assessee was asked to provide BE wise details of purchase/imports alongwith invoices/import bills and bills of entry and bank account statements. Assessee has furnished data of imports and reconciliation of the same in tabular form (copy enclosed as Annexure A-4). The same has been examined and found in order. After reconciliation of the bills of entry, purchase invoice, shipping bills and bank statement of assessee, it has been found that the invoice value of imported bills has been considered as pur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....voice value appears to be low terms of Rule 12 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007, then a new value is re-determined in terms of Rule 4 to 9 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 and this determined value becomes accessible value and custom duties collected on the said determined value even though transaction value is different. Thus, it appears that accessible value which has been considered by the A.O. is not suppression of purchase price or unaccounted purchase. Moreover, the value of the goods assessed/re-determined by the custom authorities as per valuation norms for the purpose of calculation of custom duty on the import. Therefore, the same would not attract the provisions of Section 69C of the Act, since, it has not been established as une....