9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Price enhancement of I.V. Cannulae by Commissioner of Customs, discrepancy in price between manufacturer's office and agent in Switzerland, absence of discount structure in manufacturer's price list, consideration of quantity discount in bulk purchases, legitimacy of transaction in international trade. Analysis: The appeal was filed against the Commissioner of Customs, Madras's order enhancing the price of I.V. Cannulae from US $0.35 to US $0.40 per piece. The department claimed to have obtained the price from the manufacturer's Calcutta Office, where it was listed as US $0.40 per piece for India. The appellant's representative argued that despite the manufacturer's listed price, the appellants purchased the goods from the manufacturer's agent in Switzerland at US $0.35 per piece. The agent had acquired the goods at a lower price of US $0.32 per piece due to a bulk purchase discount. The appellants then sold the goods to the appellants at US $0.35 per piece after adding their profit margin, as evidenced by the invoice from the agent. The appellant contended that the price they paid should be accepted. The department, represented by the learned SDR, maintained that the manufacturer's price of US $0.40 per piece should be accepted as it was obtained by the department without any discount structure. The Tribunal considered both arguments and noted that while the department had the manufacturer's price list, it did not include any discount structure. On the other hand, the appellants provided evidence of the order placed by the agent, showing a price of US $0.32 per piece for specific quantities. The goods were sold to the appellants at US $0.35 per piece after the agent's profit margin was added. The Tribunal recognized that bulk purchases often entail quantity discounts in international trade, and in this case, the discount amounted to about 11% over the list price. Since there was no evidence to suggest that this discount was improper, the Tribunal deemed it legitimate. The transaction was considered normal in international trade, with the appellants purchasing the goods through the manufacturer's agent at a discounted price and reselling them at a slightly higher price after adding their profit margin. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the confiscation of the goods and the penalty imposed, allowing the appeal with consequential relief.
|
