9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Application for waiver of pre-deposit of customs duty based on the disputed enhancement of assessable value by the Deputy Commissioner and subsequent rejection of appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals).
Analysis: 1. Assessable Value Dispute: The appellant, M/s. Sources India Impex Pvt. Ltd., contested the enhanced assessable value of Knitted Velvet Fabric imported from China, which was raised by the Deputy Commissioner from US $0.90 to US $2.40 per meter. The appellant argued that the comparison with other Bills of Entry from October 2000 was incorrect as their invoice was dated September 20, 1999. They relied on legal precedents like Mirah Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs and Eicher Tractors Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs to shift the burden of proof to the Revenue, emphasizing the lack of additional evidence for the value enhancement by the Customs Department. 2. Standing Order Interpretation: The appellant's advocate highlighted that the standing order issued by the Chief Commissioner of Customs on February 4, 2000, specifying minimum prices, did not account for factors like country of origin or fabric quality, making it inapplicable to their case. Conversely, the Department contended that the minimum prices indicated in the standing order were binding regardless of other considerations, and the burden of proof was shifted to the appellant, who failed to meet it. 3. Tribunal's Decision: After considering both parties' arguments, the Tribunal found merit in the Department's assertion that the standing order only mentioned minimum rates, rendering factors like country of origin and quality immaterial. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled that the appellant did not establish a strong prima facie case for a complete waiver of pre-deposit of customs duty. However, acknowledging the financial hardship claimed by the appellant, the Tribunal directed them to deposit Rs. 1 lakh within eight weeks, granting a waiver for the remaining duty amount pending appeal, with recovery stayed until resolution. The compliance deadline was set for August 31, 2001, indicating a temporary relief measure based on the financial circumstances presented. This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the legal intricacies surrounding the dispute over assessable value, the interpretation of the standing order, and the Tribunal's decision on the waiver of pre-deposit of customs duty, providing a comprehensive understanding of the case's key aspects and outcomes.
|
