TMI Blog1999 (10) TMI 504X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alled upon to show cause why the vehicle should not be assessed at Rs. 10,57,322.00 plus freight of Rs. 30,226.00, why the same should not be confiscated under Section 111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and why personal penalty should not be imposed under Section 112(a) of the Act. The importer submitted detailed objections to the show cause notice. He also produced invoice evidencing purchase of the vehicle and Certificate No. IM-50167, dated 12-12-1995 issued by manufacturer of the vehicle, namely, M/s. Mitsubishi Motors Corporation, Tokyo, Japan. He also produced another certificate issued by M/s. Mitsubishi Motors Corporation relating to another vehicle of the same model and same engine capacity imported by one Mr. Mehar Chand to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts engine bearing No. 8159 and chassis No. CON 460SJ 00606. Value of the vehicle as per the Invoice was 51,750 Dhs. In Indian currency value comes to Rs. 5,16,465.00. To prove the manufacturer s price of that vehicle, he obtained a certificate from Mitsubishi Motors Corporation, Tokyo. That certificate bears No. IM 50167 and is dated 12-12-1995. FOB price of the vehicle in Japan was stated therein as 18 lakhs Japanese Yen. This works out to Rs. 6,15,420.00. Customs authorities did not accept the value shown in the invoice. Nor did they accept the value given in the certificate issued by Mitsubishi Motors Corporation. They proceeded to fix the value on the basis of the value of a vehicle imported by an officer named Seiji Kojima in the Japan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not properly considered by the adjudicating authority in fixing the value of the vehicle. 7. According to us, the certificate issued by Mitsubishi Motors Corporation is also not of much assistance in finding out the value of the vehicle imported. This certificate gives the FOB price in Japan. That price cannot be taken to be the price of the vehicle in Dubai. The dealer in Dubai sold the vehicle to the importer at the price shown in the invoice dated 30-1-1995, namely, 51,750 Dhs. Nothing has been brought out in this case to show that the said invoice did not evidence the true transaction between the importer and the dealer. We do not find any justification to ignore the same. 8. As stated earlier, we hold that the price shown in the in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|