per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue has filed the present appeal.

2. We have heard Shri Amresh Jain, learned DR for appellant and none appeared for the respondents.

3. The dispute involved in the present appeal relates to assessable value of the imported mix ball bearing of China origin by the respondents. As the assessing authority did not agree with the assessable value declared by the importer, he enhanced the same. On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) has held in favour of the respondents on the following grounds :

that the department loaded the value without giving the (i) reason;

that there is no expert opinion or any import by another (ii) importer as evidence for enhancing the value and;

that the department has not (iii) adduced even an iota of evidence to reject the transaction value on the ground that it is not the true commercial value of the goods.

4. The contention of Revenue is that to make uniformity in assessment of ball bearing imported from China at all the ports, the Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai issued Guidelines vide F.No. S/26-757/97-VA dated 12-12-2006 which is reproduced be