9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 320X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consignment entered for import by the appellant. This, in itself, is not acceptable as no justification had been offered for different types of goods to be treated alike. Furthermore, three conditions are pre-requisite in the deductive value method option, viz., that the sale is to persons who are not related to the person in India, that derivation of the unit price should have been from identical or similar imported goods sold in the highest aggregate quantity and that sale be in the condition as imported and about the time at which the bills are presented for import. The rejection of declared value without subjecting the invoice of the manufacturer to scrutiny is clear breach of circumstances in which rule 12 of Customs Valuation (D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri Manoj Kumar , Deputy Commissioner ( AR ) for the respondent ORDER PER : C J MATHEW This appeal arises from the rejection of challenge, mounted by M/s Lakyou Beauty India before the first appellate authority, to order revising the assessable value of various types of cosmetics, imported vide bill of entry no. 9310079/28.06.2022, under rule 7 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007. The impugned goods were also required to carry the retail selling price (RSP) in accordance with requirements of Legal Metrology Act, 2009 and relevant rules and, upon rejection of the declared value, multiplier of 0.3515 was applied to the price at which the goods were intended to be sold in the country ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of contemporaneous imports at higher price, recourse could not be had to Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007. That the onus of establishing undervaluation resting upon customs authorities, as held in decisions of the Tribunal in Commissioner of Customs, Chennai v. Adhani Exports [1999 (111) ELT 143 (Tribunal)], and affirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs, Chennai v. Adani Exports Ltd [2004 (167) ELT 131 (SC)], as well as in Neha Intercontinental (P) Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs, Goa [2006 (202) ELT 530 (Tri.-Mumbai)], had not been duly discharged and, thereby, precluded revision was a further submission made on behalf of appellant. 4. Learned Authorised Representative subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ipgloss and lipstick on which, by backward abatement of retailer discount at 15.33%, of profit margin at 20% each for retailer; wholesale distributor and importer and by exclusion of duties of customs and of integrated goods and service tax (IGST) , it was concluded that the deductive value should be 0.3515 times that of the marked retail price. 6. The ascertainment of abatement from local sale price lipgloss / lipstick was applied, across the board, to other goods in the consignment entered for import by the appellant. This, in itself, is not acceptable as no justification had been offered for different types of goods to be treated alike. Furthermore, three conditions are pre-requisite in the deductive value method option, vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
