ORDER
Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President
1. Common issues are involved in all these appeals which are hence heard together and disposed of by this common order.
2. K.D. Exports imported plastic sheeting in rolls and Y.S. Enterprises imported self adhesive plastic sheeting in rolls. The declared value was not accepted by the Customs authorities who enhanced the value; the importers cleared the goods after paying the duty on the enhanced value; they filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) who held that the payment of duty on loaded value amounts to acceptance of the loading and hence could not be challenged. He further held that the value was enhanced on the basis of the value of subject goods in international market. On these two grounds he dismissed the appeals. Hence these appeals before the Tribunal.
3. We have heard both sides. The contention of the importers is that the payment of duty on higher assessed value was only for the purpose of clearance of the goods and their filing of statutory appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) itself amounts to protest against enhancement. We accept this contention on the basis of Tribunal’s order in their own case – Final Order Nos. 1445 to 1450/04-NB(A), dated 29-10-2004 wherein the Tribunal rejected the contention of the Revenue that the appellants had accepted the value as determined and held that the filing of the statutory appeal amounted to challenge of the loading by the adjudicating authority. We also note that the decision in the case of Vikas Spinners – 2001 (128) E.L.T. 143 relied upon by the Commissioner (Appeals) in these cases has been distinguished by the later order of the Tribunal in Prasad Enterprises v. CC, New Delhi – Final Order Nos. 1329 to 1336/04-NB(A), dated 2-11-2004. As for the correctness of the loading, we find that there is no evidence adduced by the Revenue regarding import of similar goods at higher value. In the case cited supra, the Tribunal set aside the enhancement on the same basis and allowed the appeals. The ratio of that decision is applicable on all fours to the facts of the present case and therefore, following the ratio thereof, we set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals.
Operative part of the order already pronounced in the open Court on 29-3-2005.