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

1997 (7) TMI 337

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... were assessed on the basis of documents submitted by the importer/appellants on 9-1-1991. However, on the basis of an information that the PCBs were grossly undervalued, detailed investigations were taken. The goods were allegedly found to be loaded PCBs for VCR. On examination, a set of 7 pcs. indicated that they were for Colour VCR for National J1 Model and National G10 Model. The impugned order referred to certain investigation. It also referred to some expert opinion taken in the case of another import at Bombay pertaining to similar goods. Based on those investigation in respect of similar goods carried out at Bombay, it was estimated that the fair assessable value in the present importation could not be less than Rs. 700/- per set wh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sent goods with PCBs for National J1 Model with G10 Model since the two are not similar. Similarly, [comparison] with import of purported similar goods imported by one R.R. Electronics at Bombay was also not justified. The appellants have also strongly disputed the contention of the department that there were no contemporaneous imports through Bombay, Calcutta, and Delhi. Ld. Advocate, at this stage, pointed out that they annexed 189 Bills of Entry during the past six years of the appellants themselves for importation of such goods. The quotations relied upon by the department are vague and fabricated. They pointed out that the quotation was from Bombay Mercantile Corporation to itself. During the course of arguments it has also been submit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s of National J1 Model at Singapore $ 65 per set. This very quotation submits the ld. Advocate, was looked into by the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta and following are the finding of the Court in respect of the quotation :- "(2) The dates of the three quotations relied upon by the Collector are not apposite. It may be stated that the two quotations are in fact dated subsequent to the notice of hearing issued pursuant to the Order 15-5-1991. (3) This Court has held that a quotation by itself being subject to negotiations cannot show underinvoicing of the goods sought to be imported [see Trident Television Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs reported in 1990 (45) E.L.T. 24]. The phrase "offer for sale" under Section 14(1)(a) of the Act would .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e quotation is wholly different from the situation in this case." 3. Apart from the foregoing, ld. Advocate has also submitted that the adjudicating authority has not commented at all on the voluminous evidence of contemporaneous import furnished by the appellants as referred to in their reply to the show cause notice dated 2nd August, 1991 made available in the Court today in the form of compilation of papers referred to it the impugned order from page 6 of the said reply dated 2nd August, 1991 following extracts are given :- "It would be interesting to note that on 189 occasions during the period of 6 years we itself have imported similar and rather identical consignments from the same supplier and that too at Calcutta Port as well .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Singapore $ 60 respectively, except the quotation referred to in his concluding portion of the order which has already been set out. We are inclined to agree with the submissions of the ld. advocate for the appellants that the quotation cannot be relied upon because of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in pursuance of which the present impugned order has been passed. Relevant portion of the judgment of the High Court on the question of quotation relied upon by the Department have already been set out. In view of the binding opinion of the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta, the adjudicating authority was not competent to rely upon the quotation in fixing the value of the imported goods. Since no other evidence has been relied u .....

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