TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (10) TMI 178
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....half of the appellants M/s. Venus Enterprises, the CHA filed 11 Bills of Entry for clearance of parts for Computer and data cartridges during the years 1995-96. In respect of certain Bills of Entry the declared value was accepted. In the remaining Bills of Entry the value was enhanced. After assessment, the consignments were allowed clearance. On the basis of intelligence, the DRI conducted investigations against the appellants. Shri T.S. Mani, was the proprietor of the appellants' Company M/s. Venus Enterprises. He was also the Director of M/s. MBO Computers (India) Pvt. Ltd., Chennai. The premises of the importer were searched and certain incriminating documents were recovered. The incriminating documents are :- (1) Parallel ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ld. SDR for the Revenue. 3.1 As per Para 3 of the adjudicating authority the Bills of Entry have been assessed after enhancement of the value against which no review or appeal has been filed. It has been held that in the following cases that enhancement is not permissible, which will squarely apply to the appeal on hand:- (i) CC v. Lord Shiva Overseas, 2005 (181) E.L.T. 213 (Tri. - Mum.) (ii) Italia Ceramics Ltd. v. CC, 2005 (191) E.L.T. 1024 (Tribunal) - 2005 (68) RLT 413 (CESTAT - Mum.) 3.2 Payments were made only through Banking channels as per invoices submitted to the Customs and no extra payments brought on record. Therefore, the charge of under-valuation cannot be sustained. The following case law were relied....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellants imported certain items by filing 11 Bills of Entry. After assessment and clearance, certain investigations were conducted which revealed undervaluation of the goods. We are of the view that the issue of show cause notice under Section 28 of the Customs Act is quite legal to demand short levy in the light of the investigations conducted subsequent to the clearance. If the contention of the appellants that no demand notice can be issued without reviewing the order of assessment, then Section 28 would become redundant. Hence we do not accept the ld. Counsel's contention that no show cause notice under Section 28 can be invoked after clearance of the goods by enhancing the declared value. The case law cited by the appellants are d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nvoices." 6. From the above findings of the adjudicating authority it is seen that the price indicated in the cost analysis statement should be taken for assessment purposes and the invoice value stands rejected in respect of such items mentioned in the cost analysis statement. We perused the cost analysis statement. It is an unauthenticated and unsigned document. Ld. Counsel strongly contended that the said document is mainly used by them for marketing purposes and not for evasion of excise duty. In this circumstance, we are of the view that the cost analysis statement cannot be used to enhance the invoice value in respect of the parallel invoices. The Commissioner has ordered that the prices mentioned in the parallel invoices should be....