MIRAH DECOR Vs. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Shri Verma, learned senior counsel for the appellant and learned Attorney General for the respondent.

(2.) On 4/01/1993, we made the following order : "shri Verma contends that the very basis of revaluation suffers from the infirmity of attracting the wrong Rules. The new Rules which came into force from 16/08/1988, stood attracted and ought to have been applied. We find this contention not substantial. The second contention of Shri Verma is that with the amendment of the show-cause notice, the earlier notice stood wholly replaced with the result that only those proposals specifically set out in the latter notice, survived and that, accordingly, the proposal for confiscation and levy of penalty contained in the first show-cause notice must be held to have been abandoned by the department. This contention is again equally insubstantial. The third contention is that the quotations for revaluation elicited from M/s Europa Wall Coverings Ltd. pertain to the year 1988, an year after the date of the import. On this we want the respondent to place before us the letters addressed by the department to the said suppliers and the quotations sent bythem in response thereto so as to ascertain whether the quotations pertained to the supplies made to the petitioner. " it is also relevant to note here that the validity of the classification of the goods was not raised and, therefore, stands concluded.

(3.) The only point, therefore, that survives is the third contention as noticed in the order dated 4/01/1993, as to revaluation. The revaluation for purposes of duty and redemption-fine was based on certain quotations, said to have been obtained from M/s. Europa Wall Coverings Limited (M/s. Europa for short). The submission is that the quotation from M/s. Europa actually pertained, as indicated by the date of the quotation itself, to the value of the goods as in 1988 and not as in 1987 when the import took place. But the revenue would say that the quotation actually referred to the very transaction M/s. Europa had with the petitioner in 1987. But no documents were produced to establish this correlation. On the contrary, it is strenuously urged by Shri Verma that the quotation relied upon by the revenue did not relate nor was it in response to any enquiry as to the value of the goods actually supplied by m/s. Europa.