9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Valuation of imported goods for Customs duty purposes. Analysis: The appeal was filed against the Commissioner of Custom (Appeals) order upholding the Additional Commissioner's decision to value the imported goods at US $425 per kg CIF, instead of the declared value of US $278 per kg. The appellants imported 'Ketoconazole USP XXII' from English suppliers, Olympia Chemicals Ltd., London, which they sold at US $278 CIF. The Department contended that the goods were imported at US $425 per kg CIF. The appellants argued that they had received offers at lower rates from other suppliers, indicating the transaction value was genuine. The Additional Commissioner rejected the appellants' contentions, leading to the appeal. The appellants contended that both lower authorities erred in rejecting the transaction value without proving the existence of extra commercial considerations. They cited comparable prices from other transactions, which the Commissioner (Appeals) failed to address. The appellants also argued that the goods' origin and nature differed from the comparable goods, making the loading of value unjustified. The Department supported the lower authorities' reasoning and referred to specific sections of the Order-in-Original. Upon review, the Tribunal found that the transaction was between a London seller and an Indian buyer for goods manufactured in Spain, sold at US $278 per kg CIF Bombay. The Tribunal noted discrepancies in the quantity and origin of comparable goods cited by the appellants. Additionally, the invoice used to load the value had been rejected in a previous case by the Commissioner (Appeals). Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Eicher Tractors Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai, the Tribunal emphasized that transaction value should be accepted unless specific grounds under Customs Valuation Rules are met. As the show cause notice lacked such grounds, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting consequential relief as per the law.
|
