Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.49 seconds)M/S Eicher Tractors Ltd., Haryana vs Commissioner Of Customs, Mumbai on 14 November, 2000
"8........................ Lastly, it is important to note that in the above decision of this
Court in Eicher Tractors (supra) this Court has held that the Department has to
proceed sequentially under Rules 5, 6 onwards and it is not open to the
Department to invoke Rule 8 without sequentially complying with Rules 5, 6
and 7 even in cases where the transaction value is. to be rejected under Rule 4.
In the present case, the show cause notice indicates that the Department had
invoked Rule 8 without complying with the earlier rules."
The Customs Act, 1962
Commissioner Of Customs And Central ... vs M/S Matsushita Television And Audio ... on 22 July, 2010
9. In the instant case, we find that the adjudicating authority has not come to a
conclusion that the transaction value as adjusted in accordance with the
provisions of Rule 10, was incorrect or misdeclared and was required to be
rejected and the assessable value re-computed under the Valuation Rules. The
adjudicating authority has in a completely ad hoc and arbitrary manner, without
any reference to any provisions of the law and as also without following the
provisions of the Valuation Rules, which lay down a codified manner of re-
computing the value, arrived at an assessable value which has no legal basis or
sanctity. It is settled law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of CCE v. South
India Television Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2007 (214) E.L.T. 3 that even if the declared
value is to be rejected the department has to apply the Valuation Rules,
sequentially and cannot arrive at the value in an arbitrary and ad hoc manner. The
relevant observations of the Apex Court in this regard are extracted herein below
for ease of reference.
1