9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Determination of additional duty of customs payable on a ship, dispute regarding the correct light displacement tonnage (L.D.T) of the ship, consideration of abatement of duty on account of damage.
1. Determination of additional duty of customs on the ship: The judgment revolves around the determination of the additional duty of customs payable on a ship, M.V. Shanta Bhibani, which was grounded after catching fire and colliding against another ship at Sikka jetty. The ship was subsequently auctioned by the Gujarat Maritime Board for recovery of port dues and purchased by the respondent with the intention to break it up into scrap. The dispute primarily concerns the calculation of the additional duty of customs, which is equivalent to the Central Excise duty leviable on goods like vessels for breaking up. The rate of duty was Rs. 800/- per light displacement tonnage (L.D.T) at the relevant time. 2. Dispute over the correct L.D.T of the ship: The central issue in the case is the disagreement over the correct L.D.T of the ship. The respondent, unable to provide necessary documents as per Note 2 to Chapter 89 of the Central Excise Tariff, claimed the L.D.T to be 2004.945 MTs based on a survey by Poseidon Marine Services. However, the department relied on information from A.B.S Pacific, stating the L.D.T as 6153 tons from their 1985 records. The Superintendent passed an order demanding duty based on the higher L.D.T certified by A.B.S Pacific, leading to an appeal by the manufacturer. 3. Consideration of abatement of duty on account of damage: The judgment also delves into the issue of abatement of duty on account of damage suffered by the ship. The counsel for the appellant argued that duty should be reduced due to damage caused between the ship's arrival in port and its examination. The assessment of damage, including fire, collision, and submergence in the sea, was crucial in determining the duty payable. The Commissioner (Appeals) considered the extent of damage, ascertained from the survey report by Poseidon Marine Services and the quantity of material obtained by breaking up the ship, to conclude that the abatement under Section 22(1)(b) should be factored in. 4. Conclusion and dismissal of appeal: Ultimately, the judgment dismisses the appeal, upholding the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner's assessment of the damage suffered by the ship and the application of abatement under Section 22(1)(b) were deemed appropriate. The judgment affirms that the duty payable should consider the damage suffered by the ship, as determined by the survey report and the quantity of material obtained post-breaking up. The decision emphasizes the importance of considering all relevant factors, including damage, in determining the duty payable on a ship for customs purposes.
|
