TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 909
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r issued u/s 17(5) of CA‟ 62 Kol/Cus/DC/" "/ApprgGr .IV(Port?/2017 1. 828 9613145 dt. 09.05.2017 12.05.2017 290 440 1940 issued on 02.06.2017 961315 dt. 09.05.2017 12.05.2017 290 440 9653394 dt. 11.05.2017 18.05.2017 290 440 2. 829 9363156 dt. 19.04.2017 09.05.2017 280 440 1785 issued on 26.05.2017 9364893 dt. 19.04.2017 09.05.2017 280 440 9364730 dt. 19.04.2017 09.05.2017 280 440 9365005 dt. 19.04.2017 09.05.2017 280 440 2. To avoid delay and demurrage charges, the said importer cleared the goods on payment of enhanced Customs Duty. The assessment order was passed under section 17(5) of the Customs Act 1962 for all the Bills of entry, as mentioned in the Table above. The Appellant filed appeals before Commissioner(Appeals), who vide order dated 25.09.2017 set aside the enhancement of values and assessed the impugned Bills of Entry....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 8. In their grounds of appeal, the Appellant stated that the importer (Respondent) has agreed to the enhancement of values and hence they cannot file appeal against the value enhancement later. In support of their contention, the Appellant cited the decision in the case of Advanced Scan Support Technologies vs. CC Jodhpur [2015 (326) ELT 185 (Tri.-Delhi)]. However, we observe that the Ld Commissioner (Appeals) has given a clear findings on this objection by citing the decision in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Delhi vs. Maruti Fabric Impex reported in 2016 (343) ELT 963 (Tri.-Delhi.) The relevant para in the impugned order is reproduced below: a. "5.....As regards the first objection, we find that the provision of Section 17 does not preclude an assessee from filing an appeal against the enhancement. The issue is no more res integra and stands settled by various decisions. In the case of Digitech Photocopier v. CC, Mumbai reported as 2009 (233) E.L.T. 425 (Tri.-Del.), it was held that forced acceptance of enhanced value when goods under detention does not debar importer to challenge such value. Reference can also made to the majority decision of the Tribunal in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by assessing authority. The Revenue had not produced any evidence regarding the import of same goods at higher value. The Tribunal in the case of Mohan Sales (supra) held as under :- "We have perused the records and have heard the learned DR. A perusal of the records of the case makes it clear that transaction values have been rejected and the goods assessed at enhanced value. No reason for the rejection of the transaction value or enhancement of value has been indicated by the assessing authority. It is well settled that transaction values constitute assessable value under the Customs Act. If the goods have to be assessed at a different value, the transaction value has to be rejected first based on the legally permissible grounds as indicated in the Valuation Rules. The assessee should also be put on notice that their transaction value is being rejected for the stated reasons and goods are proposed to be assessed at a higher value. The circumstances that permitted such rejection and the alternative basis for fixing assessable value are specified in the Valuation Rules themselves. No such legally permissible steps are found to be taken in the present case. The assessing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....med that the transaction value of such imported goods cannot be determined under the provisions of sub-rule (1) of rule 3. (2) At the request of an importer, the proper officer, shall intimate the importer in writing the grounds for doubting the truth or accuracy of the value declared in relation to goods imported by such importer and provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard, before taking a final decision under sub-rule (1). 13. In the instant case, we observe that the Respondent has imported 'EG Defective /Secondary Sheets' from the sole representative of the manufacturer and the invoice was raised by them. We observe that the Department has not brought in any evidence to reject the invoice value as declared by the importer. The department has resorted to rejection of the declared value and reassessment of the Bills of Entry on the basis of valuation of contemporary similar/identical goods at other ports as mentioned in NIDB/DGOV data. In this regard, we reproduce below the definitions of 'Similar' and 'Identical goods' as per CVR, 2007: " Identical goods" means imported goods - i. Which are same in all respects, including physical characteris....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecision of the Tribunal in Rejendra Mills Ltd. v. CC - 1997 (90) E.L.T. 68. In this decision, the Tribunal held that unless there was a basis for indicating the transaction value is not genuine, the value would be governed by Rule 7 of the Valuation Rules. In the case before us, there is nothing to indicate that the price declared by the importer was not genuine. The examining officer's remarks only stated that the declared value "appears low as per the conditions of machines." The goods were not subjected to examination by any panel of experts. No doubt as the departmental representative contends that Rule 10(L)(b) of the Valuation Rules requires the importer to furnish the manufacturer's invoice if asked for by the proper officer. The appellant on being so asked, stated that it did not have the manufacturer's invoice. We do not see how this can be held against it. It is difficult to expect in the case of second hand goods, that the manufacturer's invoice will travel with the consignment from the first every purchaser. In any event, there is no provision in the Act to say that in the absence of the manufacturer's invoice, transaction value cannot be accepted or is to be considered....