The Chennai bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) directed re-adjudication to the revenue for demanding the Customs Duty along with the enhancement value of imported aluminium powder. The Court held that the enhancement of the value of goods and raise of demand was without any speaking order.
The Metal Powder Company Ltd, the appellant assessee imported 20 MT of Aluminium powder 99.7% declaring the total cost as USD 50920 and 20 MT of Aluminium Powder 96% at a total cost of USD 50740. The assessee appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) to re-determined the value of imported goods and for the demand of customs duty.
G. Shivakumar, the counsel for the assessee contended that the original authority did not pass any speaking order and the department had enhanced the value five times the declared value which was without any basis.
Further submitted that the price declared was genuine and goods are sold to others also by the foreign supplier at a similar price and the relationship had not influenced the price and the department not considered any of the details furnished by the assessee.
R. Raja Raman and Anandlakshmi Ganesh, the counsels for the department relied on the decisions made by the lower authorities and contended that the department enhanced the value of imported goods only because the declared value of the imported goods is very low. Thus the re-determined value by the department was as per the law and liable to be sustained.
The Bench observed that the lower authorities had not considered any of the evidence furnished by the assessee and there was no detailed discussion as to how the enhancement had been arrived at by the assessing authority.
The two-member bench comprising Sulekha Beevi (Judicial) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical) remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for re-considering the assessment of the imported goods and held that the assessee was at liberty to furnish details of contemporaneous imports before the adjudicating authority who shall look into this evidence also and quashed the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
