9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the seller and the appellant-importers for purchase of the impugned vessels for scrapping. The respondents have asked for adjournment, which is declined as it is felt after hearing the learned SDR for sometime that the matter is required to be referred to a Larger Bench in view of the conflicting decisions by different co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal. 2. The learned DR arguing on behalf of the department states that in the following orders passed by different Benches of the Tribunal, it has been held that variation in the value of the vessels through addenda to the memoranda of agreement, which reduce the value, cannot be allowed for the purposes of customs valuation : - (i) CC, Ahmedabad v. Guru Ashish Ship Breakers - 2003 (157) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice for the reasons stated under the addendum and hence price of goods, as stated in the original agreement which was available at the time of import of goods, has to be accepted as the customs value under the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. 3. We find that there are contrary decisions of other Benches of the Tribunal where under variation in value has been allowed on the basis of addendum to the original memorandum of agreement in the following cases :- (i) CC, Ahmedabad v. Atam Manohar Ship Breakers Ltd. - 2003 (156) E.L.T. 151. (ii) Jai Jagdish Ship Breakers v. CC, Jamnagar - 2004 (177) E.L.T. 928. (iii) CCE, Rajkot v. Jai Bharat Steel Industries - 2005 (192) E.L.T. 792 (Tri-Mum). 4. We find that in the case of Atam Manohar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of importation is relevant. He also cited the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Malwi Ship Breaking Co. v. C.C. & C.E. (A), Ahmedabad reported in 1999 (111) E.L.T. 417 (Tri), whereunder it was held that duty is to be assessed only in terms of LDT referred to in the stability book. He also refers to the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Udyani Ship Breakers Ltd. v. C.C. & C.E., Rajkot - 2006 (195) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.), which upholds valuation on the basis of value prevailing on the date of importation and disallows abatement of duty since the importer had not taken recourse to the provisions under Section 22 of the Customs Act, 1962. We find that the issue before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Udyani Ship Breakers (cited supra) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
