Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2009 (8) TMI 547

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... RP affixed on the said imported goods, the same were assessed to CVD duty on the basis of the invoice value shown therein. In as much as the goods were admittedly liable to CVD on the basis of MRP, investigations were initiated against them and a show cause notice was issued for determination of differential duty. The said show cause notice culminated into the impugned order passed by the Commissioner confirming demand of duty of Rs. 1,83,19,587/- along with imposition of penalty of identical amount upon M/s. Euro and penalties of varying amounts on the other appellants. The adjudicating authority has also held that the goods were liable for confiscation and has accordingly imposed redemption fine. Held that- it is a case of mutual mistake .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dards of Weight and Measures (Packaged Commodities Rules 1977, on the basis of MRP declared on the package, less the abatement granted in the Notification No. 13/2002-C.E. (N.T.). Proviso to Section 3(2) required payment of CVD on the basis of MRP, on the imported goods, if there is a requirement to affix MRP on the imported goods under the 1977 Rules and if the said commodity is notified under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In as much as the bills of entry filed by the appellant for the consignments imported during the period August, 2005 till February 2006, did not declare the MRP affixed on the said imported goods, the same were assessed to CVD duty on the basis of the invoice value shown therein. In as much as the goods wer .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 005. Similarly, the imports made at Nava Sheva, before the said period has discharged duty burden on the basis of MRP. In fact by drawing our attention to the bills of entry filed at Nava Sheva Port, he submits that as per the practice, no MRP is declared by the appellant and the MRP adopted by the Customs is 2.5 times the value so declared by them. He submits that usually no MRP intimation is given by the importer. In their case such MRP Was being affixed from their depots at the time of sale of the goods from December 2005. However, after March 2006, they have instructed their foreign supplier to fix the MRP on the goods itself. 5. He submits that due to issuance of Notification No. 72/2005-Cus., dated 22-7-2005, their clearing agency M .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion of longer period was not justified. 6. Shri K.M. Mondal, learned consultant, appearing for the Revenue submits that prior to the period in question as also subsequent to the period in question, appellant had been declaring the MRP and have been paying the CVD on the basis of such MRP. As such it cannot be said that they were not aware of the fact of tiles being listed in the notification for the purposes of payment of CVD on the basis of MRP. As such they were required to declare and fix the MRP on the packages of tiles imported and pay additional duty of customs accordingly. 7. We find that there is no dispute on the fact that the vitrified tiles were leviable to CVD on the basis of MRP. In fact the appellants have discharged thei .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uld have been assessed to CVD on the basis of MRP, custom officers are expected to know the law, he should have called upon the assessee to pay the CVD on the basis of MRP. The officer also having assessed the bill of entry on the basis of Section 14 valuation, it can be safely concluded that this is a case of mutual mistake on the part of the assessee as also on the part of the customs. In the absence of any material to show any mala fide on the part of the appellant and in the absence of any material to reflect any suppression or misstatement on the part of the assessee, the longer period of limitation cannot be invoked. Non declaration of MRP, by itself cannot be held to be a suppression or a misstatement with an intent to evade payment .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates