VORA ENTERPRISES Vs. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, CALCUTTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE dispute involved in the present appeal is as regards the assessable value of second hand aluminium alloy quoted sheets imported by the appellants.

(2.) AS per the appellant duly represented by Shri A. Gupta, ld. Advocate identical goods were also imported by Shri Sushil Kr. Kaiyan, proprietor of M/s. Biswanath Sushil Kumar and their assessable value was raised to US $ 320, which is the assessable value arrived at by the Commissioner in the present case also in the first adjudication order. Shri Sushil Kr. Kaiyan filed a writ petition in the Honble High Court of Calcutta. While disposing of the said writ petition Calcutta High Court, after making some observations remanded the matter to the Commissioner for de novo adjudication. Shri Gupta submits that the appellant, on the other hand filed and appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the Commissioner enhancing the assessable value of the goods in question. The Tribunal vide its order dated 24 -9 -1994 observed that the facts and circumstances of their case were identical with the facts and circumstances of the case of Sushil Kr. Kaiyan in so far as the question of valuation of the goods is concerned. Accordingly, the matter was remanded to the Commissioner to decide the case de novo in the light of the observations of the High Court in the said case of Sushil Kr. Kaiyan. Shri Gupta submits that the Commissioner in the case of Sushil Kr. Kaiyan fixed the value of the goods as Rs. 2544/ - per M. T. as against the value of Rs. 2440/ - declared by Shri Kaiyan. However, in their case the adjudicating authority instead of adopting the value fixed in Sushil Kr. Kaiyans case as per directions of the Tribunal fixed the assessable value at US $ 287. It is the grievance of the appellant that in view of the clear directions of the Tribunal in the earlier case to fix the assessable value at the same rate at which the assessable value in case of goods imported by Shri Kaiyan is fixed, the Commissioner should have adopted the same value. In support of his evidences that the value in the case of importation made by Shri Kaiyan was fixed at Rs. 2544/ -, he draws our attention to the bill of entry filed by the said importer wherein the value has been shown to be loaded to Rs. 2544/ - per M.T. on 9 -9 -1992 i.e. after the passing of the order of the High Court. As such the prayer is that the same value be adopted in their also.

(3.) WE have heard Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, ld. SDR.