Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2024 (11) TMI 1238

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s.16,48,029/- and duty thereon as Rs.4,76,640/- 1.1. The consignment was ordered for examination and thereafter, it was found that the goods were of a much better quality i.e., made in Germany, South Korea, etc. Based on these findings, the value was enhanced and additional duty of Rs.25,23,360/- was demanded. 2. The importer/appellant vide their letter dated 14.06.2018 replied stating that the goods were manufactured in China, but were compatible with the Volvo, Deutz, Komatsu, Hyundai, etc., brand equipment; as per requests of importers, the brand name and country of origin were mentioned in these filters. After this, the importer requested for re-examination by a technical expert. 2.1. As per their request, a DGFT-approved Chart....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rms of the Customs Valuation Rules has not been followed for arriving at the enhanced value of the consignment. He submits that it is a fact borne on record that the overseas exporter had sent an e-mail stating that the goods were of Chinese origin and were not manufactured in other countries such as Thailand, Germany, Korea, etc., as is being claimed by the Revenue. Therefore, it is his contention that the enhanced value adopted by the Revenue is legally not tenable. 5.1. The Ld. Advocate for the appellant prays that the impugned order be set aside in toto and the present appeal be allowed. 6. The Ld. Authorized Representative of the Revenue takes us through the detailed findings given by the ld. adjudicating authority in the impugne....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e fact that the filters carried the brand names of reputed parties such Komatsu, Deutz, Volvo, etc., along with the countries of origin embossed as 'Germany', 'Korea', etc. This basically would allow the importer to sell these filters to buyers who want to replace these filters with the original branded filters. Hence, we find that the value as shown in the invoice of the Chinese exporter cannot be accepted prima facie. 8.1. The importer himself had volunteered to pay the differential Customs Duty of Rs.25,23,360/- as per the enhanced value arrived at by the Customs officials, but subsequently appears to have changed their stand and sought re-examination of the goods by the Chartered Engineer. There is nothing on record to indicate that ....