TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 508
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d bills of entry were re-assessed by the proper officer of the customs by enhancing the value of the imported goods without passing any speaking order in almost all cases (with few exceptions) as provided under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. 3. All the six appellants preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against such re-assessment orders and the learned Commissioner (Appeals) while passing following Order-in-Appeals remanded back the matters to the Assistant Commissioner for passing speaking order: Sr.No. Name of the appellant Order-in-Appeal Nos. & date 01 M/s. Tha Tulsidas Ramji MUN-CUSTM-000-APP-417 to 445-17-18 dated 01.03.2018 in 26 Bills of Entry/Assessment Orders stated therein 02 M/s. H. R. & Sons MUN-CUSTM-000-APP-382 to 416-17-18 dated 28.02.2018 in 35 Bills of Entry/Assessment Orders stated therein 03 M/s. Mahendra Kumar & Brothers MUN-CUSTM-000-APP-034 to 060-18-19 dated 04.05.2018 in 9 Bills of Entry/Assessment Orders stated therein 04 M/s. Kamlesh Traders MUN-CUSTM-000-APP-034 to 060-18-19 dated 04.05.2018 in 9 Bills of Entry/Assessment Orders stated therein 05 M/s. Vasani Cold Chain Pvt. Ltd.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llowing the appeals of the department. The parties aggrieved by the above orders have preferred the present appeal. 6.1 The appellant during hearing and in grounds submitted as follows:-That the impugned order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) is cryptic and he has not given any specific orders of assessment of Bills of Entry. The Principal Commissioner had inter alia claimed relief in the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) to set aside impugned Order-in-Original passed by the Assistant Commissioner and grant any other relief as may be deemed fit under the law and in the interest of justice. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) while passing impugned order has ordered that ".... I hold that the impugned orders of the lower authority are not legal and proper. Accordingly, I set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals filed by the appellant department." It means he has set aside the re-assessment order passed by the Assistant Commissioner in remand, allowed the appeal but not restored original re-assessment order enhancing the declared transaction value declared in the check list which was set aside by himself nor order to assess all the bills of entry at su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(1) ibid also clearly provides that subject to the provisions of Rule 3, the value of imported goods shall be transaction value of identical goods imported at or about the same time as the goods being valued. Rule 4 ibid is starting with the words "subject to the provisions of Rule 3 of these rules" it means Rule 3 has overriding effect over the provisions of Rule 4. Accordingly, provisions of Rule 3 will prevail over the provisions of Rule 4 in case of conflict between the two provisions. When transaction value as per Rule 3(1) is available, question of applying any other transaction value does not arise particularly when there is no cogent documentary evidence to presume that declared transaction value was not true. 7.4 It was further submitted that Rule 4(3) ibid specifically mentions that „In applying this rule, if more than one transaction value of identical goods is found, the lowest such value shall be used to determine the value of imported goods.‟ As such applying this rule, the lowest of the transaction value is to be used to determine the value of imported goods. However, such situation may arise only in cases where transaction value in terms of section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Rule 12 of the said Rules permits the assessing officer to reject declared value. Rule 12 inter alia broadly clarifies at Explanation (1) (iii) (a) to (e) circumstances in which the assessing officer can raise doubts on truth or accuracy of the declared value. Out of the same, the order has discussed Explanation (1) (iii) (a) in the impugned appeal and reproduced Rule 12 However, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that the said Rule does not empower the assessing officer to reject declared true transaction value on whims and fancies and that „reason to doubt‟ does not mean „reason to suspect‟. Besides, Rule 12(2) specifically directs that 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 by such importer and provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard, before taking a final decision under sub-rule (1). However, the Appellant was never informed of the reasons for doubting the truth or accuracy of the declared value of wet dates by the department in terms of rule 12(2) of the said Rules, though it had protested against re-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....MMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI - 2017 (348) E.L.T. 534 (Tri. - Del.) • VENTURE IMPEX PVT. LTD. Versus C.C. (IMPORT & GENERAL), NEW DELHI - 2016 (338) E.L.T. 759 (Tri. - Del.) • SEDNA IMPEX INDIA PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, FARIDABAD - 2017 (347) E.L.T. 317 (Tri. - Chan.) 7.13 Appellants further submitted that harmonious reading of the above judgments makes it clear that declared transaction value cannot be rejected merely based on NIDB data of similar/ identical goods without any cogent reasons duly supported by evidence. The learned adjudicating authority in impugned order has rightly pointed out at para 15 in the impugned order that "If the Proper Officer found some higher prices on contemporaneous imports, he should have conducted an inquiry to substantiate the same with incontrovertible evidences which should have been confronted to the importer before passing speaking order for rejection of declared value...." Under such circumstances, they submit that even if the learned adjudicating authority had misplaced reliance on Board‟s Circular No. 26/2013-Cus dated 19.07.2013 & NIDB data as per Para 12 of the OIA, the fact remains Pt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....adjudicating authority has also correctly pointed out that the misdeclaration can also be the basis for rejection of transaction value, but the same is absent in the instant case. Further, we also find force in various cases law cited by the appellants as well as relied upon by the original authority that sanctity cannot alone be placed on NIDB data for rejecting invoice value. We, therefore, find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has hastily and without proper discussion set aside the order of adjudicating authority through his cryptic reasoning. We, therefore, hold that rejection of transaction value even when based upon NIDB data cannot be done without disclosing materials, as well as identical nature of the goods, and transaction value rejecting through reasoned order. In absence of the same on the part of proper office rejection of transaction value without complete disclosures is invalid. Further, in 2019 (367) ELT 3 (S.C.) in the matter of CENTURY METAL RECYCLING PVT. LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court while dealing with Rule 12 has summarised the following requirements for rejection of valuation, same are reproduced below:- "15. The requirements ....