9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Undervaluation of imported machine and assessment of assessable value. Analysis: The case involved the importation of a four-color offset press by a company, which was challenged by the customs authorities for undervaluation. The customs authorities proposed an enhanced value for the machine and also sought to deny the Open General Licence for clearance due to the machine's age. The Additional Collector of Customs, after hearing the appellant, increased the assessable value of the machine but allowed the benefit of the O.G.L. This appeal was against the order enhancing the value. The appellant argued that the show cause notice lacked material to support the enhanced value, citing a Chartered Engineer's Certificate indicating the machine's manufacturing year and residual life. The appellant also highlighted discrepancies in comparing the machine with others imported by different companies. The appellant relied on previous tribunal decisions and a Customs Board order to support their case. The tribunal analyzed the arguments presented by both parties. The appellant contended that comparing second-hand machines of different years and models from various countries for valuation purposes was not appropriate. The tribunal agreed with this argument, emphasizing that such comparisons were not valid due to market conditions, demand variations, and machine conditions. The tribunal noted that the Chartered Engineer's Certificate did not provide sufficient information for accurate valuation. The tribunal also considered the condition and residual life of the machine in question compared to similar ones imported by other companies. The Vice President's order delved into a detailed comparison of the imported machine with a similar one imported by another company, highlighting the similarities and differences in features, condition, and expected residual life. The Vice President calculated the expected price of the imported machine based on the price of a new equivalent machine and reconditioning charges, concluding that the declared price was significantly lower. The Vice President also justified the Additional Collector's decision to reduce the assessable value based on reasonable considerations and comparisons with similar machines. In conclusion, the tribunal rejected the appeal, upholding the Additional Collector's order. The tribunal emphasized the importance of reasonable assessment based on recognized parameters and considerations specific to each case. The tribunal also dismissed the relevance of case law cited by the appellant, affirming that the assessment had been conducted appropriately based on the available evidence and material. In a separate order, Member (J) agreed with the Vice President's view and rejected the appeal, thereby affirming the decision of the Additional Collector.
|
