2019 (10) TMI 422 - AT - Customs

Valuation of imported goods - Old Used Offset Printing Sheet-Fed Machines - enhancement of declared value - enhancement only based upon the suggestions made by the Chartered Engineer - HELD THAT - It is well settled law that before taking up the matter for enhancing the value of the imported goods in terms of Valuation Rules, Revenue is under an onus to establish that the transaction value agreed upon between the importer and the supplier of the goods was not reflecting the agreed transaction value. Revenue is required to produce evidence to show that the agreed upon price was not the sole criteria for supply of the goods and there was some under-hand transactions. In the absence of the same, the enhancement proceeding cannot be initiated against the importer. The Hon ble Supreme Court in case of M/S SANJIVANI NON FERROUS TRADING PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE SERVICE TAX, NOIDA 2017 (3) TMI 359 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD has held that assessment in terms of Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 has to be done on the basis of price which is actually paid. In the absence of any exercise done by the Revenue to show that the transaction price was not the price actually paid to the supplier of the goods, the enhancement cannot be done. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of assessee.

Summary

Issues: Request for Adjournment, Enhancement of Imported Goods Value

Request for Adjournment:
The judgment pertains to a request for adjournment made by the Appellant, which was rejected by the Tribunal. The Tribunal proceeded to decide the appeal due to a short issue covered by precedent decisions. The learned Authorized Representative for the Respondent was present during the proceedings.

Enhancement of Imported Goods Value:
The case involved the import of "Old & Used Offset Printing Sheet-Fed Machines" at a declared value of Euro 34000. Subsequently, based on a Chartered Engineer report, the Lower Authorities enhanced the value to Euro 67600, leading to the confirmation of duty demand and imposition of penalties. The Tribunal noted that the enhancement was solely based on suggestions by the Chartered Engineer. It emphasized that before enhancing the value of imported goods, the Revenue must establish that the agreed transaction value did not reflect the actual value, and there were underhand transactions involved. In the absence of evidence to support this, the enhancement proceeding cannot be initiated against the importer.

The Tribunal highlighted that the Revenue did not reject the transaction value in the present case. Citing a Supreme Court case, it reiterated that assessment under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 must be based on the price actually paid. Since the Revenue failed to demonstrate that the transaction price was not the actual amount paid to the supplier, the Tribunal concluded that the enhancement was unjustified. Relying on settled law, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal with consequential relief to the Appellant.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issue of a request for adjournment and the enhancement of the value of imported goods. It underscored the importance of evidence to support value enhancements and reiterated the legal requirement to base assessments on the actual price paid. The decision provided relief to the Appellant based on established legal principles and precedents.