2010 (8) TMI 291 - AT - Central Excise

Valuation contemporaneous goods sub-standard goods cannot be same as for normal grade and that the respondents have adopted a value for such sub-standard goods, which is only lower by 10% - adoption of a lower value by only 10% cannot be called into question

Summary

Issues: Valuation of impugned goods 'Amorphous Chips' of normal grade and sub-standard grade.

In the judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, CHENNAI, the issue of valuation of 'Amorphous Chips' of normal grade was considered. The respondents argued that the price closely approximated the price of contemporaneously imported goods from other countries. While imported goods cannot be strictly considered similar as per Customs Valuation Rules, the Tribunal found them broadly comparable. They referred to a previous appeal where the department's proposed enhancement was rejected due to the close approximation of prices with contemporaneously imported goods. The Tribunal, therefore, upheld the valuation method used by the respondents for the normal grade 'Amorphous Chips'.

Another issue addressed was the challenge by the department regarding the lower valuation of amorphous chips of sub-standard grade. The respondents argued that the value for sub-standard goods should be lower than normal grade goods, and they had adopted a value 10% lower for the sub-standard goods. The Tribunal accepted this argument, noting that since the sub-standard grade of the impugned goods was not under challenge, a 10% lower valuation was reasonable. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the department's appeal on this issue was not maintainable and rejected it.

In conclusion, the Tribunal held that the department's appeal was not maintainable on both accounts of valuation for normal grade and sub-standard grade 'Amorphous Chips'. Therefore, the appeal was rejected. The cross-objection filed by the respondents in support of the impugned order was also dismissed. The judgment was pronounced and dictated in the open court, providing a comprehensive resolution to the valuation issues raised in the case.