Essel Mining And Industries Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs And Service Tax ...
- CitationAppeal No. 42/2014
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
In an appeal concerning enhancement of the assessable value of exported goods, the value cannot be enhanced by reference to other shipping bills where the details of those other bills were neither disclosed to the assessee nor otherwise available on record, and where there is no contemporaneous evidence supporting the enhancement. Where the same issue has already been decided by the Tribunal in the assessee's own case, the Tribunal is bound to follow that earlier decision, and an order enhancing value on the same grounds is set aside accordingly.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 42/2014 dated 03/04/2014 passed by Commissioner of CUSTOMS, VISAKHAPATNAM-I (Appeal).]
For approval and signature:
HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER
1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? No 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? No 3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? Seen 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Yes
Essel Mining And Industries Ltd Industry House, 18th Floor, 10 Camac Street KOLKATA 700 017. Appellant(s)
Versus
Commissioner of Customs And Service Tax Visakhapatnam-Cus. CENTRAL EXCISE BUILDING, PORT AREA, VISAKHAPATNAM 530 035. ANDHRA PRADESH
Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Mr. Viswa Sai, Advocate LAKSHMI KUMARAN & SRIDHARAN WORLD TRADE CENTRE NO.404-406, 4TH FLOOR, SOUTH WING BRIGADE GATEWAY CAMPUS NO.26/1, DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 055 KARNATAKA For the Appellant
Mr. Mohd. Yusuf, Addl. Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent
Date of Hearing: 29/04/2015
Date of Decision: 29/04/2015
CORAM:
HON'BLE SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE SHRI B.S.V.MURTHY, TECHNICAL MEMBER
Final Order No. 21057 / 2015
Per : ARCHANA WADHWA
After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit, we proceed to decide the appeal itself inasmuch as the issue is covered by the earlier decision of the Tribunal in the appellants own case. The dispute relates to valuation of exported iron ore mines. The lower authorities have enhanced the value based upon some other bills and other shipping bills, the details of which are neither provided to the appellant nor available. We also note that there is no contemporaneous detail.
2. Tribunal vide Final Order No.20027-20028/2015 dated 6.1.2015 in the appellants own case has passed a detailed order and has held that in the absence of contemporaneous evidences and in the absence of details of other shipping bills disclosed in the proceedings, the enhancement cannot be upheld. By following the earlier decision, we set aside the impugned order also. Stay petition as also appeal gets disposed of in above manner. (Order pronounced in open court)
B.S.V.MURTHY TECHNICAL MEMBER ARCHANA WADHWA JUDICIAL MEMBER
rv 3
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free