9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 842X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... EX(DB) - A/52114/2017-EX(DB) - Dated:- 2-3-2017 - Shri. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Shri Manish Saharan, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Yogesh Agarwal, DR for the Respondent Per M. V. Ravindran: This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No.IND-I/331/2009 dated 30.12.2009. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of the records, we find that the issue in this case is regarding the value of the goods cleared by the appellant form his 100% EOU Unit to DTA and the duty liability thereon. Appellant is an 100% EOU and manufactures copper and brass ingots from the scrap purchased, as an EOU. Whenever clearances are affected by the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sale of ingots by the appellant. The sales are to independent buyers and the price is the sole consideration for such sale. However, the original authority recorded that in respect of copper ingots, the price declared by the appellant is much lower than the price of copper ingots mentioned in LME list. We find the price mentioned in LME list cannot be automatically compared to that of sale in domestic market. Further, it is also not recorded whether the copper ingot, price for which was listed in LME is comparable to the copper ingots manufactured and cleared by the appellant. Admittedly, the appellants are manufacturing copper ingots using scrap. There is no indication in the original order that such scrap based ingots are listed in LME an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cision in the case of Prabhu Dayal Prem Chand 2010 TIOL-43-SC-CUS. The Hon ble Supreme Court observed that in the absence of any details regarding contemporaneous import, reliance cannot be placed automatically on the price notified in the LME bulletin. We also refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in J.D. Orgochem Ltd. 2008-TIOL-74-SC-CUS . The said decision dealt with the background of rejection of transaction value and the need for evidence to support the claim of under valuation. In the present case, we also note no attempt has been made by the Revenue to examine the contemporaneous price of similarly situated market in India, so that a comparison could have been made for examining the correctness of transaction value adopted by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
