9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Misdeclaration of value in import documents, applicability of Customs (Valuation) Rules, 1988, comparison of declared value with manufacturers' price list, legality of special discounts on old stocks, relevance of Apex Court decision on transaction value.
In this case, the ld. Commissioner of Customs determined the assessable value of goods at Rs. 35,86,846 based on a comparison with manufacturers' list prices, alleging misdeclaration by the importers. The appellants argued that they received special discounts on old stocks, which were commercially acceptable and not under-invoiced. The ld. Counsel referenced the Apex Court decision in Eicher Tractors Ltd. v. CC, Mumbai, emphasizing that discounts on old stock are a common practice and should be considered in valuation. The Revenue argued that the age of the bearings justified the enhanced value for duty calculation, supporting the Commissioner's decision. The Tribunal noted that the imported bearings were indeed old stock, subject to high clearance discounts by manufacturers. No evidence proved a discrepancy in the transaction value declared by the importers. Relying on the Apex Court decision, the Tribunal held that the declared value was correct, rejecting the reliance on manufacturers' price lists for stock clearance sales. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, granting any necessary relief to the appellants as per the law. This judgment delves into the interpretation of Customs (Valuation) Rules, 1988, the treatment of special discounts on old stocks in import valuation, and the significance of transaction value in determining assessable value for duty calculation. The Apex Court decision cited by the appellants played a pivotal role in establishing the legality of special discounts and the inapplicability of manufacturers' price lists in cases of stock clearance sales. The Tribunal's analysis focused on the factual circumstances of the case, emphasizing the commercial acceptability of discounts and the absence of evidence supporting a deviation from the declared transaction value. Ultimately, the Tribunal's decision aligned with the principles outlined in the Apex Court judgment, leading to the reversal of the Commissioner's order and a favorable outcome for the appellants.
|
