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

2003 (8) TMI 332

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . M/s. Thapar Dupont Ltd. (TDL) established a plant at Gummudipoondi, Tamil Nadu in the year 1997 for manufacture of tyre cord fabric from Nylon 66 yarn imported from Du Pont Singapore. It was originally planned as a joint venture in 1994 of Du Pont India Ltd., Ballarpur Industries Ltd. (BIL) and Mitsui of Japan under the name of TDL. In 1996 BIL moved out of the joint venture and Du Pont India Ltd. acquired 98% shares of TDL and the name of the company was changed to Du Pont Fibres Ltd. (DFL) from April, 1998. Later a decision was taken not to set up facility for manufacture of Nylon 66 yarn from basic raw materials and it was decided to manufacture tyre cord fabric from out of imported Nylon 66 yarn. Nylon 66 yarn with denier varying from .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... price at which the goods were sold to DFL. According to the appellant, the fact that the price remained the same even for sale to unrelated person, would prove that the relationship had not influenced the price before 1-1-2000. Under these circumstances, according to the appellant, the Department should have accepted the transaction value. It is also contended that no reason has been given by the authorities and as a matter of fact no finding is entered regarding the admissibility of transaction value. 5. It is the contention of the appellant that the provisions contained under Rule 6 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 have not been correctly applied to the facts of the case by the authorities before enhancing the transaction value. In .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n all respects, have the characteristics and the component materials which enable them to perform the same functions and to be commercially interchangeable with the goods being valued having regard to the quality, reputation and the existence of trade mark. In the present case the appellant would submit that nylon filament yarn of lower denier is used in general applications like manufacture of sewing threads and is entirely different from the range of yarn imported for producing tyre cord fabric with denierage varying from 840 D to 1890 D. In support of the above contention, the appellant placed reliance on the opinion given by Dr. Srinivasan, Professor of IIT (retired). Therefore, according to the appellant, the lower authorities have err .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... earned Counsel pointed out that the decision of this Tribunal in Garment Craft v. Commissioner was affirmed by the Supreme Court in 2001 (130) E.L.T. A271, (S.C.). Reliance was also placed on CC, Chennai v. Hewlett Packard Ltd., 1999 (108) E.L.T. 221. It was also a case of import from related person and the Department s action for enhancing the value on the basis of small quantity of import made by another importer was not approved by the Tribunal on the ground that the levels, both commercial and quantity in the two imports were very widely different and therefore not comparable. The appellant further points out that no adjustment was made by the appellate authority in view of the fact that the transactions were at different commercial lev .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... saction value was correctly rejected and that the enhancement made is justified. 11. We find merit in the contention raised by the appellant. Even if the buyer and seller are related the transaction value has to be accepted in view of the provisions contained under Rule 4(3)(a) of Customs Valuation Rules provided that the relationship did not influence the price. Sub-rule (3)(b) proves that in a sale between related person transaction value shall be accepted whenever importer demonstrates that the declared value of the goods being valued, closely approximates to the transaction value of identical goods, or of similar goods, in sales to unrelated buyers in India at or about the same time. In the present case the appellant has made availabl .....

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