TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 704
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....acts of the case are that the appellant had imported Gurjan Round Timber Logs from Myanmar through Cudd lore Port and had filed Bills of Entry (BOE) for assessment of Customs duty. In order to verify the correctness of the price declared by the appellant, data relating to similar imports through Tuticorin Port were verified by the department along with data from NIDB. It appeared that the recorded price was higher than the price declared by the appellant. Since the appellant had not allegedly produced any evidences confirming the truth and accuracy of the value declared in their invoice, the value declared by the appellant for the impugned goods was rejected for the purpose of assessment in terms of Rule 3(1) read with Rule 12 of the Custom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ovided to them as per law. The redetermination done by the Lower Authority invoking rule 9 of the CVR is not proper or correct. The Appellate Authority further failed to consider that as per the statutory provisions contained in the CVR and the judgment of the Supreme Court the valuation of the goods when being rejected and re-determined had to be done sequentially and it does not permit any choice to the assessing authority and more particularly in this case when the original authority admits to the existence of the contemporaneous value for similar goods he ought to have only determined the price under rule 5 of the CVR and ought not to have invoked rule 9 ibid. The Appellate Authority further failed to consider the provisions of Rule 5(i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3/13-14 dated 21.08.2013 NATFO/49389 dated 29.07.2013 20,583.957 24,397.56 2,05,585/- 3 18/2014 (cud) (Cus) dated 28.04.2014 08/2014 dated 26.02.2014 24/13-14 dated 21.08.2013 NATFO/4940 dated 29.07.2013 20,255.524 24,397.56 1,76,408/- 4 19/2014 (cud) (Cus) dated 28.04.2014 09/2014 dated 26.02.2014 25/13-14 dated 21.08.2013 NATFO/4941 dated 29.07.2013 20,602.430 24,397.56 1,41,941/- 5 20/2014 (cud) (Cus) dated 28.04.2014 10/2014 dated 26.02.2014 26/13-14 dated 21.08.2013 NATFO/4942 dated 29.07.2013 20,527.127 24,397.56 1,66,438/- 6 21/2014 (cud) (Cus) dated 28.04.2014 04/2014 dated 26.02.2014 14/13-14 dated 04.07.2013 NATFO/4861 dated 20.06.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Long Length: 29,824/- & short length: 28,445/- 3,91,268/- 14 31A/2014 (Cud) (Cus) dated 12.05.2014 16/2014 dated 18.03.2014 34/13-14 dated 12.09.2013 T/13-335 dated 03.09.2013 Long Length: 20,441.56 & short length: 19,698.230 Long Length: 29,824/- & short length: 28,445/- 3,96,859/- 15 32A/2014 (Cud) (Cus) dated 12.05.2014 17/2014 dated 18.03.2014 35/13-14 dated 12.09.2013 T/13-336 dated 03.09.2013 Long Length: 20,441.56 Long Length: 29,824/- 4,16,648/- 5. We find that this is a case of valuation of imported Gurjan Round Timber Logs from Myanmar. Department has relied on B.E. No 9510941 dated 07.03.2013 for the reference value, wherein the invoice contains the price of Rs 24,397.56 pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of goods in parameters such as description, quality, quantity, country of origin, year of manufacture or production; (e) the non declaration of parameters such as brand, grade, specifications that have relevance to value; (f) the fraudulent or manipulated documents. (emphasis added) The explanation though not exhaustive excludes assumptions and presumptions. 7. Clause iii(a) which is relevant to this case states that the proper officer shall have the powers to raise doubts on the truth or accuracy of the declared value based on the significantly higher value at which identical or similar goods imported at or about the same time in comparable quantities in a comparable commercial transaction. In this case ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e proper officer has to apply his mind and decide whether or not reasonable doubt as to the truth or accuracy of the value so declared persists. (d) When the proper officer does not have reasonable doubt, the goods are cleared on the declared value. (e) When the doubt persists, sub-rule (1) to Rule 3 is not applicable and transaction value is determined in terms of Rules 4 to 9 of the 2007 Rules. (f) The proper officer can raise doubts as to the truth or accuracy of the declared value on certain reasons which could include the grounds specified in clauses (a) to (f) in clause (iii) of the Explanation. (g) The proper officer, on a request made by the importer, has to furnish and intimate to the importer in....