9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
Determination of assessable value of painted statues imported by M/s. Venus Insulation Products Mfg. Co. Analysis: The appeal filed by M/s. Venus Insulation Products Mfg. Co. raised the issue of determining the assessable value of painted statues they imported. The Appellants imported 611 original sculptures of Italian origin, made of clay bonded with resin. The Commissioner of Customs, Goa enhanced the value to Rs. 18,83,101/- C.I.F. based on the manufacturer's price list, leading to confiscation of the goods and imposition of fines and penalties. The Appellants argued that the impugned goods were old stock with fading paint and lustre, mostly consisting of unpopular figures, and purchased at a significantly lower price due to the manufacturer wanting to clear old stock. They contended that comparing the old stock prices with the 1999 price list of fresh production was not valid, as the goods were not of comparable quality or demand. The Appellants also highlighted the Supreme Court's decision allowing discounts on list prices after bargaining, emphasizing that the declared transaction value should be accepted for customs duty assessment in the absence of exceptions under the Valuation Rules. The Department, represented by Shri P.K. Jain, argued that Rule 10A allows rejecting declared values when there are doubts about their accuracy, as in the case of artistic goods where high discounts could diminish their value and appeal. However, the Tribunal found merit in the Appellants' argument that prices obtained from the Internet were unreliable for comparison under the Customs Valuation Rules. The Tribunal noted that the Department relied on the manufacturer's price list in an Addendum to the Show cause Notice, issued after a personal hearing where the Appellants did not respond. Considering the lack of response and the need for fair adjudication, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration, directing the Appellants to submit their reply to the Addendum within a specified timeframe. The Tribunal emphasized expeditious adjudication within three months, given the goods were still with the Department. In conclusion, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal by remanding the matter for fresh adjudication, emphasizing the importance of considering the Appellants' submissions and ensuring a fair process in determining the assessable value of the imported painted statues.
|
