Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal New Delhi has upheld the Department order as the proposed transactional value was expressly accepted by the importer.
The appellant, M/s Manvi Exim Pvt. Ltd. imported certain products and filed eight Bills of Entry based on self-assessment and which were assessed at higher values by the assessing authority based on contemporaneous data. The assessee accepted the value and after payment of duty in terms of the re-determination of the value, the eight appeals were filed by the respondent before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the assessment order, hence aggrieved revenue filed an appeal before CESTAT.
The counsel for the revenue submitted that the importers had accepted the enhanced value and there was, therefore, no necessity for the assessing officer to determine the value in the manner provided for in rules 4 to 9 of the Valuation Rules sequentially. The counsel for the revenue by relying on the decisions of the Tribunal in Vikas Spinners vs. Commissioner of Customs and Guardian Plasticote Ltd. vs. CC (Port) further submitted that the appellant gave consent to the value proposed by the Revenue and stated that it did not want any show-cause notice or personal hearing, the Revenue didn’t need to establish the valuation any further as the consented value became the declared transaction value requiring no further investigation or justification.
The Tribunal observed that the importers had agreed to the enhancement of the declared value in the letters submitted by them to the assessing authority, which itself implies that the importers had not accepted the value declared by them in the Bills of Entry. The value declared in the Bills of Entry, therefore, automatically stood rejected.
The Tribunal further observed that the Commissioner (Appeals) completely failed to advert to the crucial aspect that the importers had themselves in writing accepted the enhanced value. The respondent is not justified in asserting that the transaction value has been determined based on NIDB data as it was their acceptance of the value that formed the basis for the determination of the value.
The Coram of Mr. Justice Dilip Gupta, President, and Mr. P.V. Subba Rao, Member (Technical) while allowing the appeals has set aside the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).
Mr. Rakesh Kumar and Mr. Nagendra Yadav appeared on behalf of the revenue and Mr. Abhishek Jaju, Advocate appeared on behalf of the assessee.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentBuy books of essential tax practice with exciting offers at shopscan.in
