Identical or Similar Imported Goods evaluated at Substantially Higher Values in comparable Transactions are assessed under Rule 12 of CESTAT procedural rules: CESTAT [Read Order]

The Ahmedabad bench of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) observed that the Identical or Similar Imported Goods Evaluated at Substantially Higher Values in Comparable Transactions are Assessed under Rule 12 of CESTAT Procedure rules

The Appellant M/s Deeplalit Enterprises Pvt. Ltd is engaged in the trading of electronic goods including branded and non - branded flash memory cards which were imported during 2008 –09 and 2009 –10 at Air Cargo, Ahmedabad which after being duly examined by the proper officer for its description and assessment were allowed to be cleared upon payment of duty assessed

Mr. Vikas Mehta, representing for the Appellant submitted that the lower authorities have erred in invoking the provisions of Rule 5 of Customs Valuation ( Determination of Value of Imported Goods ) Rules, 2007. He submitted that for valuation of goods as contemporaneous imports the Authorities have considered the bill of entry accruing to March, May and June 2009 with country of origin as Taiwan and China when the bill of entry filed by the Appellant was that in July 2009 and subsequently no country of origin was showed for the Appellant.

He also submits that the Commissioner ( Appeals ) under section 111(m) and 114 A of the Customs Act 1962 has held the goods liable for confiscation and imposed Penalty on the Appellant. He submits that the adjudicating authority has levied the said imposition without authority of law as the past imports were called upon for investigation which were cleared after examination without any objection so being raised in terms of mis-declaration in the first place

The Rule 12 – Explained that the proper officer shall have the powers to raise doubts on the truth or accuracy of the declared value based on certain reasons which may include - (a) 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 were assessed

The two member bench of the Tribunal comprising Ramesh Nair ( Judicial member ) and Raju ( Technical member ) found that the department in its show cause notice issued to the appellant has not raised any discrepancy towards the declared quantity of goods in order to attract confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act. Neither from the records was it evident that any mis-declaration of value in respect of any entry has been made under the Customs Act nor was the Commissioner ( Appeals ) able to adduce any evidence regarding their claims. In this view confiscation of the goods does not sustain and was set aside.

The CESTAT set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals with consequential relief to the appellant, if any, in accordance with the law

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates