9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - CESTAT AHMEDABAD ] has gone into the aspect as to whether the amendment carried out has retrospective effect or not and has held that Personal penalty imposed on the Senior Executive - HELD THAT:- Since the basic issue is held in favour of the Appellant and their Appeals have been allowed, the Appeal filed by the third Appellant is allowed by setting aside the personal penalty imposed to him. - Customs Appeal No. 197-199 of 2002 - FINAL ORDER No. A/30153-30155/2023 - Dated:- 7-6-2023 - MR. R. MURALIDHAR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. A.K. JYOTISHI, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Ch. Sumanth, Advocate for the Appellant. Shri P. Amresh, Authorised Representative for the Respondent. ORDER The Appellant has imported edible ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of value of imported goods Rules 2007) wherein explanation was added as under: Explanation The cost of transport of the imported goods referred to in clause (a) includes the ship demurrage charges on charted vessels, lighterage or barge charges . [emphasis supplied] After this amendment was carried out, the Counsel concedes that the assessee importer is required to add the value of barge charges when the Bill of Entry are presented for assessment. He draws our attention to the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Ispat Industries Vs CCE, Mumbai [2006 (202) ELT 561 (SC)] wherein the Supreme Court had gone into the issue as to whether barge charges, freight charges etc., were to be included in the total value and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C)] has held as under: 60. In the impugned order dated 7-3-2001 the Tribunal has based its decision on its conclusion that the place of import was the Dharamtar Jetty and not the BFL (vide paragraphs 9 to 18 of The Tribunal s order). Without commenting on the correctness or otherwise of this view, we are of the opinion that whether we treat the place of import as BFL or the Dharamtar jetty it will make no difference to the conclusion we have reached viz. that charges for transport of the goods by barges from BFL to Dharamtar jetty cannot be included in the valuation of the goods. In this case, the Hon ble Supreme Court has also gone into the applicability of Garden Silk Mills Ltd., Vs Union of India [1999 (13) ELT 358 (SC)] which wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has submitted that the place of importation is not where the ship is anchored (BFL), but the jetty which has been approved for unloading of the goods under Section 8 of the Act. Hence, he submitted that the transportation charges for carrying goods from the mother ship by barges to the jetty has also to be included in the valuation of the goods for imposing duty. In our opinion, the decision of this Court in Garden Silk (supra) is clearly distinguishable .[emphasis supplied] The Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar Vs Grasim Industries Ltd., [2013 (296) ELT 39 (Tri-LB)] has gone into the aspect as to whether the amendment carried out has retrospective effect or not and has held as under: 10. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
