2008 (12) TMI 207 - AT - Customs

Contemporaneous imports valuation - We find that import at Rs. 3/- was in the months of July and September, 2001 while import in the present case is in the month of October, 2001. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that there was an import in October, 2001 at Rs. 10.08 per soap. Therefore, the claim of the appellants that the declared price should be accepted is not tenable. However, price of Rs. 10.08 having been noticed for import made in the same month, there is no reason why Rs. 10.08 should not be fixed instead of Rs. 12/- . We, therefore, hold that MRP of the soap in question should be Rs. 10.08, modify the impugned order to this extent

Summary

Issues: Valuation of goods based on Maximum Retail Price (MRP) discrepancy between declared value and actual import prices.

In this case, the issue revolves around the valuation of GIV soap 80 grams weight based on the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) set by the authorities. The appellants contested the MRP fixed at Rs. 12 per piece, arguing that their declared value was Rs. 3.20 and later accepted as Rs. 6 per piece. They claimed that the MRP of Rs. 12 was arbitrary as imports during the relevant period were at Rs. 3 or Rs. 4. On the contrary, the JDR argued that based on a declaration by M/s. Mathewsons Exports & Imports Pvt. Limited, the MRP of the soap was Rs. 12 per piece, justifying the valuation at that price.

Upon careful consideration of both arguments, the Tribunal noted that imports at Rs. 3 occurred in July and September 2001, while the disputed import took place in October 2001. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed an import in October 2001 at Rs. 10.08 per soap. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the appellants' claim for the declared price but found the MRP of Rs. 12 excessive. Given the observed import price of Rs. 10.08 in the same month, the Tribunal decided to set the MRP of the soap at Rs. 10.08, modifying the previous order and partially allowing the appeal.