Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Allite Enterprises Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Allite Enterprises vs Commissioner of Customs

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Nov 16, 2000
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/19757

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Allite Enterprises

Respondent

Commissioner of Customs

Legal References

Reported In
(2001)(127)ELT281TriDel

Excerpt

.....importer. the present appeal is directed against the said order in adjudication.2. we have heard the ld. counsel for the appellant and ld. sdr for the revenue. we find that the basis for the charge of mis-declaration of value as made out in para 5 of the show cause notice is as under :- "whereas the importer has declared the price of this item @ us $ 19.00 (rs. 831.25) per pcs. for 9 fins oil filled radiator and @ us $ 20.00 (rs. 875) for 12 fins oil filled radiator. on inquiry in the local market the identical goods were not found, however, the similar type of the heat radiator of fedders lloyed make are available @ rs. 6900 each. which contains only 7 fins." 3. rule 8 of the customs valuation rules, forbids, in terms, the adoption of value of indigeneously produced goods as a basis for valuation of goods to customs duty. rule 8(2) of the valuation rules reads as under :- "no value shall be determined under the provisions of this rule on the basis of- 4. from the above, it is clear that the very basis of the proceeding was against the specific terms of customs valuation rules. in such a case, the adjudication order passed, has to be held as illegal and set aside. we do so. with consequential relief to the appellant. we are informed that the imported goods are still with the customs. they shall be assessed to duty on the basis of the declared values and released to the appellant, forthwith.

Full Judgment

1. The appellant imported 413 pcs. of Oil filled Radiators (room heaters) at Jaipur. The clearance of the goods was sought on payment of Customs duty on the basis of the declared prices of US$ 19 per pc. for 9 fins Radiators and US $ 20 per pc. for 12 fins Radiators respectively. The Customs Authorities did not accept the value declared by the appellant. They issued show cause notice dated 10-12-99 proposing confiscation of the goods under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act on the ground that the declared value did not correspond to the correct value of the goods. The appellant disputed the charges.

However, an adjudication Order No. 6/2000 dated 21-7-2000 was passed by the Commissioner of Customs rejecting the value declared by the appellant, ordering the assessments of the goods based on the value ascertained during market enquiry, confiscating the goods under Section 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act and imposing a penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs on the importer. The present appeal is directed against the said order in adjudication.

2. We have heard the ld. Counsel for the appellant and ld. SDR for the Revenue. We find that the basis for the charge of mis-declaration of value as made out in para 5 of the show cause notice is as under :- "Whereas the importer has declared the price of this item @ US $ 19.00 (Rs. 831.25) per pcs. for 9 fins oil filled radiator and @ US $ 20.00 (Rs. 875) for 12 Fins Oil Filled Radiator. On inquiry in the local market the identical goods were not found, however, the similar type of the Heat Radiator of Fedders Lloyed make are available @ Rs. 6900 each. Which contains only 7 Fins." 3. Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules, forbids, in terms, the adoption of value of indigeneously produced goods as a basis for valuation of goods to Customs duty. Rule 8(2) of the valuation Rules reads as under :- "No value shall be determined under the provisions of this rule on the basis of- 4. From the above, it is clear that the very basis of the proceeding was against the specific terms of Customs Valuation Rules. In such a case, the adjudication order passed, has to be held as illegal and set aside. We do so. With consequential relief to the appellant. We are informed that the imported goods are still with the Customs. They shall be assessed to duty on the basis of the declared values and released to the appellant, forthwith.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial