9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 886 - AT - CustomsValuation - inclusion of demurrage charges in the assessable value - Held that - Larger Bench 2013 (10) TMI 246 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD was examining the excludability of demurrage charges in the assessable value between two CBEC circulars 14/2001-cus dated 02/2/2001 and 26/2006-cus at 26/9/2006, therefore, the period got mentioned in Para 14 of this order was 02/3/2001 to 26/9/2006. However, the law laid down on excludability of demurrage charges by the Larger Bench was as per Para 12 of the Larger Bench order. It has been clearly held in Para 12 of the Larger Bench judgment in the case of CC Jamnagar vs. Grasim Industries Limited (Supra) that ship demurrage charges need to be included in the assessable value from the date when provisions of Customs Valuation Rules 2007 came into force. It is also evident from Rule 1(2) of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of imported goods) Rules 2007, issued under Notification No. 94/2007-cus (NT) dated 13/9/2007, that these Rules came into force with effect from 10/10/2007. The period involved in the present appeals is prior to 10/10/2007 as evident from Para 1 of the order dated 18/8/2009 passed by the first appellate authority. In view of the Larger Bench decision of Ahmedabad Bench in the case of CC Jamnagar vs. Grasim Industries Limited (Supra) ship demurrage charges paid by the appellant for the period prior to 10/10/2007 are not includable in the assessable value. - Decided against Revenue.
Issues involved:
Inclusion of demurrage charges in the assessable value. Analysis: The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the inclusion of demurrage charges in the assessable value. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue argued that demurrage charges should be included, citing grounds of appeal. On the other hand, the Advocate for the Respondent referred to a Tribunal decision in a similar case where the appeal was allowed. The Revenue challenged a Larger Bench decision before the Supreme Court, which was admitted. The Tribunal, in the Respondents' case, had held that demurrage charges should not be included in the assessable value for the period before 10/10/2007, based on the Customs Valuation Rules 2007. The Tribunal followed the decision in the case of Grasim Industries Limited, concluding that demurrage charges paid before 10/10/2007 are not includable in the assessable value. In the Respondents' case, the Tribunal considered the issue of including demurrage charges in the assessable value. The Tribunal referred to a Larger Bench judgment and stated that demurrage charges need to be included in the assessable value from the date when the Customs Valuation Rules 2007 came into force. The Tribunal clarified that the period involved in the appeals was before 10/10/2007, as per the first appellate authority's order. Following the decision in the case of Grasim Industries Limited, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, stating that demurrage charges paid before 10/10/2007 should not be included in the assessable value. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the inclusion of demurrage charges in the assessable value. The Tribunal relied on the Customs Valuation Rules 2007 and the decision in the case of Grasim Industries Limited to determine that demurrage charges paid before 10/10/2007 should not be considered in the assessable value. The appeal filed by the Revenue was rejected based on the Tribunal's findings and the precedent set by previous judgments.
|
