The New Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) directed the Proper Officer to pass speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962, as there was mismatch in the reassessed value and self-assessment by the importer.
The present appeal is with respect to one among 30 Bills of Entry arising out of common Master Bill of Lading which got split into various House Bills pertaining to the same Respondent-Assessee. All the Bills of Entry pertain to one importer for import of same commodity i.e. Aluminium Scrap imported more or less during the same period/time.
The counsel for the respondent submitted that the Department deserved an opportunity of hearing which stands denied to the Department due to order challenged by the Department in above mentioned 30 reassessed value of the impugned goods was accepted by the Assessee-Respondent in view of Section 17 (4) of Customs Act, 1962. The importer despite depositing the differential duty based on said re-assessed value had still filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The said appeal has been and the said order has error apparent on face of its record, being in violation of mandate of Section 128 A 2(3) of the Customs Act, 1962.
A Two-Member Bench comprising Rachna Gupta, Judicial Member and Hemambika R Priya, Technical Member observed that “The value was enhanced without any speaking order as the proposed enhancement was fully accepted by the importer vide his consent given in writing to the proper officer. Due to this, speaking order was not required as per sub-clause 5 of Section 17 of the Act, as quoted above. In such situation, Commissioner (Appeals) had to refer the matter back to the proper officer/adjudicating authority for fresh decision/order, in terms of above quoted sub-clause (ii) of Section 128A (3) (b) of the Customs Act, 1962.”
“We further observe that the Bills of Entries were self assessed by the importer. However, on verification of value therein, the proper officer opined it to be undervalued. He accordingly proposed the enhanced value. The importer respondent gave consent in writing for the value so proposed, paid the differential duty as per the value so enhanced and took the out of charge order. Subsequently, treating the said enhancement as the assessment order by proper officer, the importer-respondent filed 30 appeals (one for each Bill of Entry) before Commissioner (Appeals)” the Tribunal noted.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
