2024 (10) TMI 637 - AT - Customs

Finalization of assessment based on the Report which is available on dry weight basis because of which Fe content has been taken as 63% - requirement to pay export duty @ 300 per metric ton - HELD THAT - Time and again, it has been held that WMT content can be arrived at by using the formula given in the case of V.M. SALGAOCAR AND BROTHER PVT. LTD., MR. SHIVANAND V. SALGAONCAR. VERSUS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT) , GOA, DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE, CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES CUSTOMS MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI, UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 2022 (9) TMI 1306 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT , which has been affirmed by various Tribunals including this Tribunal. Reliance placed in M/S. NARBHERAM VISHRAM VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF C.G.S.T. AND CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, BHUBANESWAR 2024 (7) TMI 1080 - CESTAT KOLKATA wherein this Bench had accepted the submission of the Appellant and remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority to apply the formula to arrive at the moisture content as Fe‟ content and finalize the assessment. Matter remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to apply the formula to arrive at the Fe content and finalize the assessment - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Finalization of assessment based on Fe content for exported Iron Ore fines.
2. Discrepancy in Fe content calculations between appellant and Adjudicating Authority.
3. Applicability of WMT basis for determining Fe content.
4. Tribunal's authority to remand the matter for assessment based on WMT.

Analysis:
1. The judgment concerns the finalization of assessment for exported Iron Ore fines by the Adjudicating Authority based on Fe content, leading to a dispute between the appellant and the authority. The appellant's export duty liability is determined by the Fe content, which is crucial for calculating the duty amount per metric ton.

2. A significant discrepancy arises in the Fe content calculations between the appellant's declared values at the time of export and the values considered by the Adjudicating Authority. This discrepancy impacts the duty amount payable by the appellant, highlighting the importance of accurate Fe content determination for duty assessment.

3. The appellant argues for the application of the Wet Metric Ton (WMT) basis to ascertain the Fe content at the time of final assessment, emphasizing the relevance of WMT content calculation for accurate duty determination. Citing precedents and the formula established in a specific case, the appellant contends that WMT content calculation is a valid method endorsed by the Tribunal and other authorities.

4. The Tribunal, in its decision, acknowledges the appellant's argument regarding the use of WMT basis for determining Fe content and finalizing the assessment. Referring to previous Final Orders and the consistency in applying the formula for WMT content calculation, the Tribunal exercises its authority to remand the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for reevaluation based on the WMT formula. This reaffirms the Tribunal's role in ensuring the correct application of legal principles and methodologies in duty assessment matters.

In conclusion, the judgment addresses the crucial aspects of Fe content determination for duty assessment, highlighting the necessity of accurate calculations and the applicability of the WMT basis in finalizing assessments. The Tribunal's decision to remand the matter underscores the importance of adhering to established formulas and legal precedents in resolving disputes related to duty liabilities for exported goods.