AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Dr. D. M. Misra, Member (J)
None present for the respondent.
The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No. 16/2012-Customs dated 29.05.2012 passed by the Commissioner of CE, Customs & ST (Appeals), Cochin.
Briefly stated facts of the case are that the respondent has imported betel nuts against Bill of Entry No. 001 dt. 18.04.2012 by declaring its value as Rs. 36.82 per kg. Rejecting the declared value, the Revenue enhanced it to Rs. 79.87 per kg on the basis of the examination of the officers of Customs. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent filed an appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), who set aside the said order and remanded it to the adjudicating authority. Hence, the Revenue is in appeal against the said remand order.
Reiterating the grounds of the appeal, the ld. A.R. for the Revenue submits that even though the respondent has not requested for provisional assessment, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) while remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority allowed the assessment to be considered as provisional assessment, therefore, the order of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is devoid of merit, hence, be set aside.
On going through the order of ld. Commissioner (Appeals), we find that while recording the observation that the respondent disputed the method of enhancement of value of betel nuts by only by virtual inspection and request for sample test by Agmark Laboratory which was denied to them; the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) observed that such an action by the department is contrary in the principle of law and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority observing as follows:
It is also seen that the assessee had, in original proceedings, sought for provisional assessment under Section 8 of the Customs Act, 1962. Under Rule 18, importer can make a request for provisional assessment and this request should, therefore, have been considered by the original authority.
For the above reasons, the assessment is set aside and the proper officer of customs is directed to draw a sample and have it tested in Agmark or any other reliable laboratory for testing the grade of the betel nuts before assessing the duty by adoption of value of clearances of contemporaneous imports matching the grade of imported goods. In the meanwhile, the original authority may allow provisional assessment in accordance with Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962, if the assessee so requests.”
In the above reasoning of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), we do not find any discrepancy and also in remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority. Consequently, the impugned order is upheld and the Revenue’s appeal being devoid of merit is dismissed.