9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Valuation of imported goods based on country of origin, applicability of exemption notification, and differential duty calculation.
In this case, the appellant imported Kowa Brand Projector Lenses from Singapore and declared the value in the Bill of Entry. Subsequently, a notice was issued to revalue the consignment based on higher prices of the same product from Japan. The appellant argued that the goods were of Singapore origin, and the prices from Japan should not apply. The Tribunal noted that the Bill of Entry clearly stated the country of origin as Singapore, and the Department should have raised concerns about the declaration earlier if they believed it to be false. The Tribunal referenced previous cases where prices of goods from different origins of the same brand were not interchangeable. As the Department failed to provide evidence of higher prices for goods from Singapore, the Tribunal found no justification for increasing the value. Regarding the applicability of Notification No. 93/86 for a reduced rate of duty, the appellant contended that if the valuation issue was resolved in their favor, the question of duty rate would become irrelevant. The Tribunal refrained from deciding on this issue due to allowing the appeal based on the valuation matter. Ultimately, the Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' decision and allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant based on the lack of justification for increasing the value of the imported goods from Singapore. The Tribunal did not address the question of the duty rate or the applicability of the exemption notification due to the favorable decision on the valuation issue.
|
