2015 (5) TMI 1221 - AT - Customs

Valuation of imported goods - polyester partially oriented yarn - revision of assessable value upwards - value revised upwards from US dollars 0.70 per Kg. to USD 0.91 per kilogram - HELD THAT - It is a fact that the entire quantity as per the contract was not imported and only a quantity of about 6600 MTs. was imported when the anti-dumping duty was imposed making further imports unviable for the appellant. It is also a fact that the supplier did not demand any additional amount on the ground that the entire quantity as per the contract was not imported. It is not the Revenue s case that any additional amount was paid to the suppliers for the goods already imported for not importing the entire quantity as per the contract. Indeed there was a very valid reason for not importing the entire contracted quantity because the imposition of anti-dumping duty, which could not have been foreseen at the time of entering into the contract, made the imports unviable for the appellant. Thus, it was not a case of manipulation or stratagem. The transaction value remained US 0.70 Kg. and there is no legal basis to reject the same - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Revision of assessable value of imported goods
- Applicability of discounts in import transactions
- Impact of anti-dumping duty on import viability

Revision of assessable value of imported goods:
The appeal was filed against the Order-in-Appeal upholding the revision of the assessable value of polyester partially oriented yarn imported by the appellant from USD 0.70 per Kg. to USD 0.91 per kilogram. The primary adjudicating authority revised the value upwards, arguing that since the entire contracted quantity was not imported, the appellant was not entitled to various discounts as per the contract.

Applicability of discounts in import transactions:
The appellant contended that they had imported over 6600 Mts. of goods before anti-dumping duty was imposed, making further imports unviable. The supplier, understanding the situation, did not charge any extra amounts for canceling the contract. The transaction value for the imports remained at USD 0.70 per Kg., and the appellant argued that there was no basis for revising the value upwards to USD 0.91 per Kg.

Impact of anti-dumping duty on import viability:
The Tribunal considered that the imposition of anti-dumping duty made further imports unviable for the appellant, leading to the non-import of the entire contracted quantity. The supplier did not demand additional amounts due to this situation. The Tribunal found that there was a valid reason for not importing the full quantity as per the contract, as the duty was unforeseen at the time of entering into the agreement. The transaction value remained at USD 0.70 per Kg., and the Tribunal referred to previous cases where similar issues were decided in favor of the appellant.

Conclusion:
Considering the circumstances and the legal basis presented, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant. The decision highlighted the impact of unforeseen circumstances such as anti-dumping duty on import transactions and the applicability of discounts in such situations, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the transaction value based on the original agreement terms.