9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved: Valuation of imported furnace oil for customs duty assessment.
Summary: The appellant, a cement manufacturer, imported furnace oil through their own port at Mul Dwaraka. The value of the imported furnace oil was enhanced by the lower authority from US$ 150 P.M.T. to US$ 174 P.M.T. based on comparable imports by other importers and the appellant's own import at a higher value under another Bill of Entry. The appellant contended that the enhancement of value was contrary to the law on the valuation of imported goods, emphasizing that imported goods should be valued at their transaction value. They explained that the variation in prices was due to fluctuation in furnace oil prices in the international market and that their purchase price was determined based on a specific pricing formula. Additionally, the appellant highlighted that their private port operations allowed for better freight deals, reducing vessel detention time and improving turnaround time. Upon review and hearing, it was observed that the rejection of the appellant's transaction values in favor of higher values from other imports lacked justification other than contemporaneous higher prices. This action was deemed contrary to Rule 4 of Customs Valuation Rules, which mandates transaction value as the assessable value. The Tribunal clarified that the transaction value should pertain to the goods under assessment and not other transactions. The pricing formula agreed upon by the parties was considered valid, and tax authorities were not justified in rejecting prices determined by that formula. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the amounts deposited by the appellants during the proceedings were to be refunded to them.
|
