9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Alteration of price of imported vessel after entry into India. Analysis: The case involves the importation of a vessel for breaking, with an initial price indicated in the Memorandum of Agreement (M.O.A.) as US $ 7,24,675. An addendum was later signed to reduce the Light Displacement Tonnage (L.D.T.) of the vessel, leading to a decrease in the price to US $ 6,88,309. The Deputy Commissioner assessed the bill of entry based on the revised price, which was challenged by the Revenue. The Revenue argued that altering the price post-importation is impermissible, citing precedents emphasizing the date of importation as crucial for determining the value of goods for customs duty purposes. The Revenue contended that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in upholding the Deputy Commissioner's order, as any modification in price after importation and entry inwards is not allowed. Referring to previous tribunal decisions, the Revenue highlighted the significance of the importation date in determining the value of goods for customs duty. The Tribunal noted the absence of representation from the respondents and acknowledged the Revenue's prima facie case favoring their argument that the price alteration post-importation raises concerns. Consequently, the Tribunal stayed the operation of the Commissioner (Appeals) order pending the appeal, indicating a leaning towards the Revenue's position on the issue. In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision to stay the operation of the Commissioner (Appeals) order suggests a preliminary inclination towards the Revenue's argument regarding the impermissibility of altering the price of the imported vessel after its entry into India. The case underscores the importance of adhering to the value of goods at the time of importation for customs duty assessment, as established in relevant precedents and customs regulations.
|
