2008 (8) TMI 689 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Assessment of declared value of imported goods.
2. Consideration of contemporaneous import particulars.
3. Revision of price by supplier after shipment dates.
4. Rejection of declared value by lower appellate authority.
5. Interpretation of relevant legal decisions.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Assessment of declared value of imported goods
The appellants imported goods and declared a unit price of USD 783 per MT. The assessing authority proposed to enhance the value based on contemporaneous imports at USD 833 per MT. The appellants provided evidence of similar imports at the declared value, but the original authority demanded differential duty without considering this evidence. The lower appellate authority also rejected the declared value without valid reasons, leading to the present appeal.

Issue 2: Consideration of contemporaneous import particulars
The lower appellate authority failed to consider contemporaneous import details provided by the appellants. The goods cited by the appellants were shipped after 15-9-2000, while the imports used by the assessing authority to enhance value were shipped before this date. The revision of price by the supplier's group from USD 833 to USD 783 per MT after 15-9-2000 was crucial, as it affected the transaction value agreed between the parties.

Issue 3: Revision of price by supplier after shipment dates
The supplier's decision to revise the price downward to USD 783 per MT after 15-9-2000 was communicated to the Customs authorities. The sale contract between the parties was concluded after this revision date, and the shipments were made accordingly. This revision was essential in determining the correct transaction value for the imported goods.

Issue 4: Rejection of declared value by lower appellate authority
The lower appellate authority rejected the declared value based on higher values of contemporaneous imports without considering the revision of price by the supplier post-15-9-2000. The evidence provided by the appellants was crucial in establishing the correctness of the declared value, which should have been given due consideration by the authorities.

Issue 5: Interpretation of relevant legal decisions
The appellants cited legal precedents emphasizing the importance of manufacturer's invoice as the best evidence of price for imported goods. The judgments highlighted the significance of genuine invoices and the lack of necessity to compare with contemporaneous imports. The Tribunal disagreed with the relevance of an older interpretation of the law, emphasizing the current context and the evidence presented in the case.

In conclusion, the Tribunal held that the goods imported should be assessed based on the declared value by the appellants, considering the revision of price by the supplier and the evidence provided. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants, granting them consequential reliefs.