2015 (7) TMI 60 - AT - Customs

Determination of assessable value of export goods - Method of calculation of duty - determination of assessable value adopting the transaction value or on the basis of Bench-Marked Price - Held that - Decision in the assessee s own previous case 2014 (8) TMI 213 - CESTAT KOLKATA followed - Appeal disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
1. Determination of assessable value of export goods
2. Calculation of duty on 'Wet Weight' basis
3. Determination of assessable value based on Bench-Marked Price

Analysis:

Issue 1: Determination of assessable value of export goods
The first issue in the appeal pertains to the assessable value of export goods, specifically Iron Ore Fines, and whether the FOB price should be adopted as the assessable value or treated as cum duty value for goods exported after 01.01.2009. The Tribunal had previously ruled in favor of the Revenue on this matter in a prior order. The Special Counsel representing the Revenue argued in favor of this position, citing previous Tribunal decisions. The Tribunal concurred with the Revenue's stance and ruled in their favor against the Respondent.

Issue 2: Calculation of duty on 'Wet Weight' basis
The second issue revolves around the calculation of duty on either 'Wet Weight' basis or 'Dry Weight' basis for Iron Ore Fines exported after 13.06.2008. The Special Counsel contended that duty should be calculated based on 'Dry Weight' as per the agreement between the Assessee/Respondent and overseas purchasers. The Tribunal had previously decided in favor of the Assessee/Respondent on this issue in a separate order. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld its previous decision and ruled in favor of the Assessee/Respondent on this matter.

Issue 3: Determination of assessable value based on Bench-Marked Price
The third issue concerns the determination of assessable value based on the Bench-Marked Price published by CCCMMC without providing the necessary evidence/data to the Respondent. The Tribunal had previously remanded a similar case to the Adjudicating Authority for re-determination after supplying the requisite data to the Respondent. In line with this precedent, the Tribunal remanded the present case to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh determination of the assessable value after providing the relevant data to the Respondent. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a reasonable opportunity for the Appellant and directed the Adjudicating Authority to decide the issue within three months from the date of the Order.

In conclusion, the Tribunal disposed of the Revenue's Appeals on the aforementioned terms, maintaining consistency with previous decisions and ensuring a fair process for all parties involved.