9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Assessable value calculation for imported goods by air. 2. Application of Customs Appraising Manual instructions. 3. Refund claim based on inclusion of notional sea freight. 4. Duty of the appellant to provide necessary documents for refund claims. Analysis: 1. The case involves the calculation of the assessable value for imported goods by air. The appellant ordered components for car cassette players, with half to be supplied by sea and the other half by air. The assessable value for the goods supplied by sea was determined by adding the freight element to the invoice price. However, for the goods received by air, the air consignment invoice was not available to verify if it showed C.I.F. or C.I. price. The appellant paid the duty demanded but later claimed a refund, arguing that only notional sea freight should have been included in the assessable value. 2. The import in question was made before 1987 and was governed by the Customs Appraising Manual instructions. Paragraph 50(2) of the manual specifies the basis for computation for inclusion in value, which includes adding a percentage of the FOB value depending on the ports from where the goods were dispatched. The manual also provides guidelines for cases where FOB value and freight are separately available, stating that the assessable value should consider actual freight for certain commodities. For imports by air, specific instructions state that the assessable value should be based on acceptable evidence of freight and charges paid when importing by air, with consideration given to the higher costs associated with air freight compared to sea freight. 3. The appellant's counsel referred to previous Tribunal decisions where Customs House duty on air consignments was calculated by including only sea freight if ascertainable and based on the FOB value. However, the full facts of the present case were not available due to missing documents that the appellant failed to produce. It was emphasized that the appellant must provide all necessary materials for the refund claim, including FOB or C.I. price data for the goods in question. 4. In light of the incomplete information and missing documents, the impugned orders were set aside, and the jurisdictional Assistant Collector was directed to reevaluate the refund claim in accordance with the law and the observations made in the order. The appellant was reminded of their duty to present all essential materials to the jurisdictional A.C. to support their refund claims for imported goods by air.
|
