2024 (7) TMI 696

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ompelled to tender one letter dated 26.07.2018 requesting for assessment @ USD 1.25 per though no contemporaneous import at the price so high was available with department. Goods were released after enhancement of value (by citing appellant's acceptance of value enhancement) and imposition of fine as well as penalty vide Order-In-Original dated 31.07.2018. Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the matter with a direction to issue speaking order. In remand proceedings, Ld. Additional Commissioner passed the order on the same lines as earlier. 1.2. The appellant again filed appeal before Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who, vide impugned order has rejected the appeal by relying on appellant's letter dated 26.07.2018 accepting value enhance....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....We find that this issue has been considered by this Tribunal in the case of CMR Nikkei India Pvt. Ltd (Supra) wherein the following order was passed :- "8. Heard both sides and perused the records. We find that the dispute in the present case is regarding the valuation of the goods imported by the Appellant. The Assessing Authority re-assessed the imported goods at values higher than what was declared by the Appellant in the Bills of Entry for self-assessment. The Appellant accepted the enhanced value by submitting the consent letter. In spite of the acceptance before the Assessing Authority, the Appellant challenged the valuation/assessment of goods by filing appeals. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the impugned reassessment. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re-assessment. 11. Revenue has vehemently argued that the department were justified in enhancement of value since the importer had accepted such enhancement. We note that in the present matter, other than the admission on the part of the importer, no basis for the adoption of the enhanced value is given. We find that the Appellant in their grounds of Appeals also submitted that the assessment orders have been passed in complete defiance of the provisions of Section 14 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2011. Neither the provisions of Section 14 of the Customs Act dealing with "Valuation of Goods" nor the provisions of Customs valuation Rules, 2011 have been followed while assessing the impugned bills of entry. The assessment orders do not as....