2016 (11) TMI 551 - HC - Customs

Demand - undervaluation - sales effected at the price higher than the RSP - Held that - Learned counsel for the Appellant referred to the observation in the Order-in-Original that a Government Department would not purchase goods at a price higher than the RSP. In the considered view of the Court, instead of surmising on this aspect the Commissioner could easily have undertaken an enquiry with the concerned Department to ascertain whether in fact the goods were purchased at a price higher than the RSP. Consequently, the Court does not see any substantial question arising from the impugned order of the CESTAT - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
2. Appeal by the Customs Department against the final order of the CESTAT.
3. Dispute regarding imported audio-visual equipments without MRP displayed.
4. Interpretation of the Order-in-Original and decision of the CESTAT.
5. Consideration of whether the goods were sold at a price higher than the RSP to Government Departments.
6. Dismissal of the appeal by the High Court.

Condonation of delay in filing the appeal:
The High Court allowed the condonation of delay in filing the appeal, as per the reasons stated, and disposed of the application.

Appeal by the Customs Department against the final order of the CESTAT:
The Customs Department filed an appeal against the final order of the CESTAT, which partly allowed the appeal filed by the Respondent against the adjudication Order-in-Original passed by the Commissioner of Customs. The CESTAT restricted the demand to sales effected at a price higher than the RSP, a decision deemed reasonable by the High Court.

Dispute regarding imported audio-visual equipments without MRP displayed:
The case involved imported audio-visual equipments found in the business premises without the maximum retail price displayed on the packing, although duty was paid on the declared retail sale price. The Appellant sold these goods to Government Departments at a price higher than the RSP, leading to a dispute.

Interpretation of the Order-in-Original and decision of the CESTAT:
The High Court noted that the CESTAT's decision to restrict the demand to sales at a price higher than the RSP was not unreasonable. The Court also observed that the Commissioner could have conducted an inquiry with the concerned Department to verify whether the goods were indeed purchased at a price higher than the RSP, rather than making assumptions.

Consideration of whether the goods were sold at a price higher than the RSP to Government Departments:
The Court addressed the observation in the Order-in-Original that Government Departments would not purchase goods at a price higher than the RSP. It was concluded that instead of making assumptions, the Commissioner could have conducted an inquiry to verify this aspect. The High Court did not find any substantial question arising from the CESTAT's order.

Dismissal of the appeal by the High Court:
Ultimately, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Customs Department, affirming the decision of the CESTAT to restrict the demand to sales made at a price higher than the RSP.