9.2 In terms of the legal provisions governing recovery of duties not levied or short levied or short paid, such duty can be recovered by issue of SCN within 5 years from the relevant date under Section 28 ibid by invoking the extended period of time, if it involves the ingredients of collusion or wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts by the appellants with an intent to evade duty. On perusal of the case records, it transpires that in respect of 27 consignments of imported goods, the appellants had paid customs duty at the time of its import before clearance from customs control on different dates for the part value of the imported goods, as declared in the B/E and in the invoice routed through the banking channel. However, in respect of the part value of such consignments, for which additional invoices/supplementary invoices were produced by the Director of the appellant company Shri Anil Mathuradas Chopra, no customs duty had been discharged. It is not the case of the appellant that the department had recovered these additional invoices and such recovery of evidences are not proper in terms of Section 138C of the Act of 1962. Further, the appellant had disputed the method of valuation of goods to state that the value of identical or similar goods have not been produced by the department. However, since the authorities below have examined the evidences and on the basis of actual price/value of imported goods paid by the appellants had accepted the real transaction value by taking into account all the payments received by the supplier in terms of Rule 3, 4 & 9 of CVR of 1988, we find no infirmity in arriving at the re-determined value by them. Furthermore, we also note that the original authority in adjudicating the case, had re-calculated the import duty payable on the basis of the details provided by the appellant by reducing the duty to the extent it required correction in the value of goods under B/E No.728079 dated 24.03.2006.
