9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Determination of correct value for customs duty calculation of imported goods.
In this case, the main issue was the determination of the correct value for customs duty calculation of imported goods, specifically polystyrene resin High Impact Grade No. HR 60. The appellants declared a value of US $1050 PMT CIF, but the Customs authorities believed that the price was not correctly declared. The Customs sought to determine the assessable value under Rule 11 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988, read with Section 14(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, as they felt the declared price did not align with the evidence available. The Assistant Collector fixed the price at US $1200 PMT, citing discrepancies in the declared value and evidence available. The first issue addressed was the Customs' decision to enhance the value of the imported goods to US $1200 PMT under Rule 11 read with Section 14(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Assistant Collector based this decision on the belief that the importer's declared price did not align with the evidence available with the department. The appellants argued that the Customs authorities erred in rejecting the transaction value by comparing incomparable goods and ignoring evidence of invoices by the same supplier for the same goods. The appellants contended that Rule 11 was improperly applied and that the declared value should have been accepted as the price for assessment purposes. The second issue involved the Collector (Appeals) upholding the Customs' decision, noting that the high impact Grade No. HR 60 was considered costlier than general purpose polystyrene resin GP 125 and G 144. The Collector could not accept that the same supplier would charge different prices to different parties for similar goods. However, the appellants argued that the goods compared were of different grades, imported at different times, on different vessels, and from different suppliers. The appellants emphasized that the Customs ignored evidence supporting their declared value. The third issue revolved around the interpretation and application of Section 14(1) and Section 14(1)(A) of the Customs Act, 1962, along with the Valuation Rules. The Customs authorities justified their decision to enhance the value based on Rule 11 of the Valuation Rules, stating that the declared value did not satisfy Section 14(1). The appellants contested this application of Rule 11, asserting that the transaction value should be accepted if at arm's length and in accordance with the valuation rules. In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal held that the declared value of US $1050 should be accepted for customs duty calculation purposes. The Tribunal found that the evidence presented, including invoices from the same supplier and importation prices of similar goods, supported the appellants' declared value. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following Section 14(1)(A) read with Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules in determining the value of imported goods, ultimately allowing the appeal in favor of the appellants.
|
