9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Assessment of transaction value of second-hand machinery. 2. Acceptance of Chartered Engineer's certificate. 3. Consideration of contemporaneous imports. 4. Application of Customs Valuation Rules. 5. Relevance of Board's circular on depreciation for old machinery. 6. Request for de novo consideration of the matter. 7. Disposal of the matter expeditiously. Analysis: 1. The appeals questioned the assessment of the transaction value of second-hand machinery, Mortizu Mini Lab Model 1702, by the Commissioner (Appeals) based on the commercial invoice and Chartered Engineer's certificate. The Commissioner found the declared value of S$ 25,000 to be low compared to the manufacturer's price of S$ 1,47,500 for the same model in the international market. After granting depreciation at 85%, the assessable value was enhanced. 2. The Chartered Engineer's certificate, confirming the machine as re-conditioned and the reasonableness of the invoice value, was not accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals) as it lacked substantive evidence and was based on premises. The certificate's reliance on the machine's good condition and life expectancy was insufficient to support the declared value. 3. The appellants argued for the consideration of contemporaneous imports at lower values to support their declared transaction value. They provided evidence of other imports at S$ 23,000 and S$ 10,000, but the Department had not furnished a report on these imports. The Tribunal directed a reevaluation considering this evidence and the authenticity of the imports. 4. The Customs Valuation Rules were invoked to determine the assessable value, considering the price of a comparable new machine and the CIF value of the Color Mini Lab. The authorities applied Rules 5, 6, and 7 for valuation, distinguishing the judgments cited by the appellants as not applicable to the case. 5. The Board's circular on depreciation for old machinery was highlighted by the appellants, emphasizing the need for separate valuation of old machinery. The authorities were directed to consider this circular in the reevaluation process to ensure accurate depreciation calculations. 6. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the original authority for a fresh assessment, allowing the appellants to present additional evidence to support their declared transaction value. The reevaluation should also consider the Board's circular and the authenticity of contemporaneous imports. 7. The Tribunal also remanded a related appeal for de novo consideration, mirroring the issues and arguments presented in the first appeal. Both cases were to be reevaluated based on the submissions made and the observations of the Tribunal. 8. Additionally, a direction was given to dispose of the matter expeditiously due to the prolonged detention of the goods since 1998, urging the original authority to prioritize the case for a swift resolution while providing the appellants with a fair hearing opportunity.
|
