9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (10) TMI 197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal arises of Order-in-Original No. S/10-68/84-J, dated 22-8-1984. The appellants imported 11600 pieces of TAM Branch bearing No. 7511 (SKF 32211) @ Hongkong dollar 9 per piece. The case of the appellants is that they entered into a contract on 1-10-1983 with the supplier under which they opened an irrevocable Letter of Credit dated 29-12-1983 with the State Bank of India, Nunhai, Agra. The last ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant filed the present appeal. 2. The main contention of the appellants is that the Department has not doubted the genuineness of the contract and, therefore, the price mentioned in the contract should be accepted. In support of the said contention, he relied on a judgment of the Calcutta High Court reported in Sneha Traders v. Collector of Customs, 1992 (60) E.L.T. 43 (Calcutta). He also s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of assessment is the deemed value. Therefore, even though genuineness of the contract is not doubted Department is not bound to accept the contract price. He further pointed out that under Section 14(1) the value of goods shall be deemed to be price at which such or like goods are ordinarily sold or offered for sale for delivery at the time and place of importation in the course of international ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Collector relied upon the invoice dated 10-4-1984 under which 4608 pieces were imported @ US dollar 2 per piece. Admittedly, the quantity imported by the appellant is 2 1/2 times more than the quantity imported under the invoice dated 10-4-1984. Therefore, the price mentioned in the invoice dated 10-4-1984 cannot be treated as comparable price for the purpose of Section 14(1) of the Customs Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
