9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 1802 - AT - CustomsValuation of imported goods - dry dates of Sukkur variety - enhancement of value based on DRI alert - absence of contemporaneous import - rejection of transaction value not done - Held that - In the order of the adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals), no contemporaneous imports of identical or similar goods have been mentioned. The goods were imported from a particular region from Pakistan but no contemporaneous imports of that variety of dry dates at higher prices is found in both the orders - The sole basis of enhancement of value is the calculation chart appended with the Nhava Sheva alert circular. The enhancement of the value on the basis of SIIB alert circular without first rejecting transaction value as per procedure under Rule 12 of Customs Valuation Rules, is not legally tenable as held by this Tribunal in the case of Sedna Impex India Pvt.Ltd. 2016 (10) TMI 517 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH . Refund claim - Section 14 of the Customs Act - Held that - the value for purposes for refund of special additional duty has no relevance for the purpose of Section 14 of Customs Act, 1962. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
1. Enhanced value of imported dry dates based on an alert circular. 2. Contemporaneous imports of identical or similar goods. 3. Rejection of transaction value under Customs Valuation Rules. 4. Justification for higher value for special additional duty refund. 5. Legality of enhancing value without rejecting transaction value. Analysis: Issue 1: Enhanced value based on alert circular The appellant imported dry dates from Pakistan, and the value was enhanced to USD 718 per MT based on an alert circular. The Tribunal noted that no contemporaneous imports of identical or similar goods at higher prices were found. The Commissioner (Appeals) relied on website information, but the Tribunal held that such information cannot be the basis for value enhancement without contemporaneous imports. The rejection of transaction value was not done according to the procedure laid down in Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. Issue 2: Contemporaneous imports The Tribunal highlighted that no contemporaneous imports of the same variety of dry dates at higher prices were found in the orders. The Commissioner (Appeals) conducted research from websites, but this alone could not justify the enhancement of value without evidence of contemporaneous imports. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of contemporaneous imports in determining the value of goods. Issue 3: Rejection of transaction value under Customs Valuation Rules The Tribunal found that the rejection of transaction value was not done in accordance with the procedure under Rule 12 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The sole basis for enhancing the value was the calculation chart from the alert circular, which was deemed legally untenable without first rejecting the transaction value as per the prescribed procedure. Issue 4: Justification for higher value The Commissioner (Appeals) justified the higher value adopted by the appellant for the purpose of a special additional duty refund under a specific notification. However, the Tribunal disagreed with this reasoning, stating that the value for refund purposes did not hold relevance for determining the transaction value under the Customs Act, 1962. Issue 5: Legality of enhancing value without rejecting transaction value The Tribunal referred to previous judgments to establish that enhancing the value based on an alert without rejecting the transaction value first was not legally permissible. The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders, concluding that they were not sustainable due to the lack of proper adherence to the Customs Valuation Rules and the absence of evidence of contemporaneous imports. This comprehensive analysis of the judgment from the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHANDIGARH highlights the key issues, arguments presented, and the Tribunal's findings regarding the enhanced value of imported dry dates and the procedural irregularities in determining the value.
|
