9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 1772 - AT - CustomsDuty chargeable on quantity of goods received or invoice value Appellant claimed that Customs duty under Section 12 of Customs Act 1962 is chargeable on basis of quantity of goods received in shore tank in cases of import of bulk liquid cargo and not on invoice value Held that - Tribunal in case of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd 2012 (7) TMI 356 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD held that even if appellant would have received lesser quantity of goods in shore tanks invoice value charged and paid by appellant would be correct value unless there is clear evidence that they have paid less amount or they have paid value/price for quantity received in shore tanks Additional Duty under Finance Act is levied and collected as duty of Customs as per provisions of Finance Act itself Court is in agreement with decision of Tribunal in case of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd and accordingly impugned order is upheld Decided against Assesse.
Issues:
1. Customs duty calculation on the invoice value vs. quantity of goods received in import of bulk liquid cargo. 2. Addition of duty computed under the Finance Act for determining Additional Duty of Customs. Analysis: 1. The primary issue in this case revolves around the calculation of Customs duty in the import of Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel. The question is whether the duty should be charged based on the invoice value or the quantity of goods received in the shore tank. The Tribunal referred to a previous case where it was established that the invoice value paid by the importer remains the correct value, even if the quantity received is less. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of clear evidence to support any deviation from the invoice value. Additionally, the judgment highlighted that the value for Customs duty calculation must align with the transaction value unless proven otherwise. 2. The second issue concerns the computation of additional duty of Customs under the Finance Act. The Tribunal reiterated that the Additional Duty of Customs under the Finance Act must be included in the value of goods for determining the Additional Duty under the Customs Tariff Act. The Tribunal cited relevant sections of the Customs Tariff Act to support this stance, emphasizing that any sum chargeable under any law as an addition to Customs duty must be factored into the value for calculating the Additional Duty of Customs. The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's argument that the duty under the Finance Act should not be added to the assessable value for computing the Additional Duty of Customs, asserting the sustainability of including such duty in the valuation process. 3. The appellant attempted to distinguish their case from a previous decision by citing a remanded issue and a Board's Circular. However, the Tribunal found that the earlier remand order did not impact the applicability of the previous decision, which was upheld by the Supreme Court. The Tribunal upheld the decision in the case of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd, which aligned with the precedent set by the Tribunal in a related matter. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the appeal filed by the Appellant, affirming the impugned order based on established legal principles and precedents. In conclusion, the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD addressed the issues of Customs duty calculation and inclusion of duty under the Finance Act for determining Additional Duty of Customs with a thorough analysis of legal provisions, precedents, and relevant case law. The decision provided clarity on the valuation process for Customs duty assessment in import transactions involving bulk liquid cargo, emphasizing the importance of adhering to transaction values and statutory provisions in such matters.
|
