9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Valuation of imported goods including evacuation costs and service charges; Allegation of suppression and invocation of larger period under Section 28 for demands
In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, the case involved M/s. Supreme Petrochem Ltd., engaged in the manufacture of Polystyrene using Styrene Monomer as raw material. The company imported goods for their own use and also for sales/trading to other actual users. The contracts entered into by the sellers and buyers were composite contracts on a long-term basis, including import and sale of goods, as well as various services provided by the seller after import. The contracts used a Weighted Average Price (WAP) due to unknown CIF values at the time of contract. A valuation dispute arose due to debit notes issued by the company to buyers, leading to allegations of suppression by the Revenue. The core issue was whether "Evacuation Costs" of clearing imported goods could be included in the valuation for duty levy. The Tribunal found that such costs incurred after import, termed as Service Charges, should not be included in the assessable value for duty recovery, leading to a total waiver of pre-deposit requirement under Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962, and a stay of recovery pending regular hearing. Due to the significant amount involved, the Tribunal ordered an out-of-turn hearing of the matters. The judgment highlighted the importance of understanding the Valuation Rules and previous decisions on the inclusion of post-import costs in the valuation of imported goods. The decision provided clarity on the treatment of service charges and evacuation costs in the valuation process, emphasizing the need for a thorough analysis of the contractual terms and the nature of expenses incurred after import. The judgment showcased the Tribunal's commitment to fair assessment practices and the importance of upholding legal principles in customs valuation disputes.
|
