2018 (6) TMI 1023 - AT - Customs

Valuation of imported goods - copper strips - enhancement of assessable value - The assessing authority places reliance on the price of the base metal published in bulletin of the London Metal Exchange and the consent of the importer to adopt that as the base for re-determination - Held that - It cannot be lost sight of that the clearance was ordered to be held up on the basis of raw material prices in the said bulletin when the goods under import were manufactured products. The rationale for the comparatively low prices was claimed to lie in the supply contracts to which importers had drawn the attention of the assessing officer who, however, chose to disregard these - The resort to prices of base metal to reject the declared price of manufactured goods, particularly, in the light of an explanation offered and not disputed is not in accordance with section 14 of Customs Act, 1962. Enhancement of value set aside - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against enhancement of assessable value of imported copper strips based on declared value; Justification of enhancement under rule 7A of Customs Valuation Rules; Application of London Metal Exchange price; Sequential application of Customs Valuation Rules; Compliance with section 14 of Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an appeal by Revenue against the dropping of the enhancement of assessable value of 'copper strips' imported by a company against multiple bills of entry. The dispute arose from the discrepancy between the declared value and the price of the base metal. The proper officer invoked rule 7A of Customs Valuation Rules due to the inability to apply preceding rules, leading to the enhancement. The first appellate authority found no merit in the enhancement, prompting the appeal.

The assessing officer and Revenue argued that the importer's justification based on a long-term supply contract was unacceptable as no registered contract existed. They contended that commercial prudence would not allow the supply price to be lower than the cost of the base metal. They also emphasized the sequential application of Customs Valuation Rules under the Customs Act, 1962.

The Authorized Representative relied on precedents supporting the adoption of prices from authoritative publications with adjustments to determine assessable value. However, the judgment highlighted the need for justified rejection of declared value and sequential application of Customs Valuation Rules, as emphasized by the Supreme Court's decision in Eicher Tractors Ltd.

The assessing authority based its decision on the London Metal Exchange price of the base metal with the importer's consent. However, the judgment criticized this approach, noting that the clearance was held up based on raw material prices despite the imported goods being manufactured products. It emphasized that consent under duress or any form of coercion cannot validate deviation from the law.

The respondent argued that similar imports at comparable rates were accepted previously, and the bypassing of preceding rules to invoke rule 7A was legally untenable. The judgment concluded that the failure to sequentially apply the Rules after considering contemporaneous evidence rendered the enhancement unlawful. Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the first appellate authority's decision to set aside the enhancements, dismissing the appeal of Revenue based on the facts and circumstances presented.