9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (SEZ), Cochin are engaged in the manufacture and export of high quality ceramic tableware. Their goods were said to have been damaged because of the flood affecting their factory premises on 22.5.2004. The said damaged tableware (assorted mugs) were sold in public auction/tender without informing or obtaining permission from the Department for a sum of Rs. 2,11,111/-. The auction was conducted in the interest and on behalf of the Insurance Company with whom the appellants filed their compensation. 2.1 The appellant viz., M/s. Tata Ceramics Ltd. declared the value of goods as Rs. 1,39,578/- in the Bill of Entry for clearance of the said 65,000 pieces of assorted chipped mugs into the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) and on an average it works ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the said unit to DTA (Domestic Tariff Area), local auction price is to be taken as the assessment value for payment of duties of Customs. (ii) Here the sale was not to a related person and the buyer of the goods was the successful competitive bidder approved by the Insurance Company and there is no allegation by the Department that the invitation of offers and the subsequent sale was not properly conducted. (iii) The Department has not given any reasons for disbelieving the price realized through the sale of said damaged goods by the appellant. (iv) The Insurance Company had also approved the price realised by the appellant after finding the same to be a reasonable price for the said goods. (v) In this case, the goods were sold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rough auction included all tax element including the Customs duty before the goods were delivered to the final bidder, whose bid was accepted. (x) The appellant has referred to Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988 and the Interpretative Notes which are Schedule to the said Rules saying that the value of the imported goods shall not include the duties and taxes in India when reference is made to the price actually paid or to be paid to the imported goods; here the appellant is referring to Interpretative Note(s) to Rule 4 of Customs Valuation Rules, 1998. 4. Revenue represented by learned AR Shri Mohd. Yousuf, Addl. Commissioner vehemently argued that the appellant sold the said goods not through perfec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this Tribunal. From the facts on record, it is clear that it was a 'distress situation' where the appellant wanted 'salvage value' and they did it by way of conducting auction, as pointed out earlier. 5.1 The Department argued that it was not done through prefect competitive bidding and right procedure was not adopted. The Department however has not been able to prove that how did the appellant not observe the right procedure, when the procedure adopted by the appellant was approved by the United Insurance Company Ltd., which was mentioned in the invoice also (Invoice No.MSIC/49/2005-06/ 29.11.2005). In the circumstances prevalent, there cannot be any fault found, more so when the goods were delivered to the final bidder at the price quot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
