9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Valuation of imported second-hand photocopy machines and importability without license under Para 2.33 of the EXIM Policy for 2003-2007.
Valuation Issue: The Commissioner (A) accepted the transaction value declared by the appellants for assessment, citing the machines as capital goods under Para 2.33 of the EXIM Policy. The revenue challenged this decision on grounds that the declared value was significantly different from verified prices of similar machines, justifying rejection under Rule 10A of the Valuation Rules. The Commissioner (A) was criticized for not considering Rules 5, 6 & 7 of the Customs Valuation Rules due to lack of evidence on the machines' age. However, the importer's engagement of a chartered engineer for valuation was accepted by the Original Adjudicating Authority. The Commissioner (A) was also faulted for not acknowledging a DGFT Policy Circular prohibiting the import of second-hand photocopiers, contrary to Para 2.33 of the Handbook of Procedures. Importability Issue: The Tribunal upheld the importability of second-hand photocopiers under Para 2.33 of the Handbook of Procedures, despite conflicting decisions from the Hon'ble Kerala High Court. The Tribunal referenced the case of M/s. Atul Commodities and emphasized judicial discipline in following the decisions of the Andhra Pradesh High Court and Calcutta High Court. The Tribunal concluded that second-hand photocopiers with a lifespan of less than 10 years fall under Para 2.33 of the EXIM Policy for 2003-2007. Valuation Conclusion: In line with the Commissioner (A)'s decision and the Apex Court's ruling in Eicher Tractors Ltd. v. CC, Mumbai, the Tribunal found no grounds to reject the transaction value under Rule 4(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, affirming the Commissioner (A)'s valuation assessment. Judgment Pronouncement: The Tribunal's decision was pronounced in open court on 5th April 2007.
|
