TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (8) TMI 140
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Appellant No. 1, M/s. Rochi Ram & Sons, Appellant No. 3 and M/s. Rajasthan Watch Manufacturers, Appellant No. 2 imported watch cases, watch dials, leather straps, winding knobs and watch hands from M/s. Legend Watch Manufacturers Ltd. (LWM in short), Hongkong; that they filed five Bills of Entry in which the value was declared as per the invoices received from the foreign suppliers; that the goods imported by the Appellant Nos. 1 and 2 were assessed to duty on the basis of the invoice price declared and the imported goods were permitted to be cleared on payment of duty; that the goods imported by the Appellants No. 3 were seized and released on execution of Bond and furnishing of bank guarantee; that subsequently show cause notices dated 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned in the invoices and there being no allegation/finding about collusion between the Appellants and the supplier of the impugned goods, extended period of limitation for demanding duty under Section 28 of the Customs Act cannot be invoked in respect of Bills of Entry at serial Nos. 2 to 5 in the Chart given in Para 1 of the impugned order. [that is Bills of Entry Nos. 37, dated 10-4-1997, 634, dated 17-5-96, 38, dated 10-4-1997 and 6461, dated 20-5-1996]. The learned Counsel, further, submitted that none of the situations envisaged in Rule 4(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules, exist and, therefore, the declared transaction value cannot be rejected; that the law on this subject is settled, most definitively, by the judgment of the Supreme Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s only on attested copy of photostate copy had been supplied to them; no stamp as was to be found on declaration submitted to foreign Customs Authorities, was to be found on the said declaration. He relied upon the decision in the case of Collector of Customs, Bombay v. East Punjab Traders, 1997 (89) E.L.T. 11 (S.C.), wherein the Supreme Court has held that if the authenticity of the photo copies of the documents is suspected, presumption under Section 139(ii) of the Customs Act cannot be raised. He further contended that no enquiry has been made by the Revenue from the foreign supplier of the goods as to why they had shown the less value on invoices in question. Finally he relied upon the decision in the case of South India Television (P) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of 4 Bills of Entry (Serial Nos. 2 to 5 in Para 1 of the impugned Adjudication Order) is time-barred as the show cause notice has been issued after the normal period of six months specified in Section 28 of the Customs Act for demanding duty and there has been neither any allegation in the show cause notice nor any finding in the impugned order about there being any collusion between any of the Appellants and the foreign supplier. Section 28 of the Customs Act provides for demanding the duty within 5 years if any duty has not been levied/short-levied or has not been paid/short paid by reason of collusion or any wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts by the importer or the agent or employer of the importer. It has not been controverted....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndia Television (P) Ltd. On the other hand the learned SDR has argued about the genuineness of the Export Declaration procured from the customs at Hong Kong and has relied upon the decision in the case of Indian Watch Parts Mfg. After considering the submissions of both the sides, we observe that the sole basis for enhancing the assessable value is the Export Declaration obtained by the Customs Authorities in India from Hong Kong Customs of which original copy has not been brought on record. In a similar facts, in the case of South India Television, the Appellate Tribunal has held as under :- "…….we find that the only basis for enhancing the assessable value of the imported goods is the export declaration furnished by the importers/sup....