Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (8) TMI 559

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... i.e. by including moisture content. The assessing officer also enhanced the value from U.S $ 100.00 to U.S$ 120.00/MT in terms of P. N. 40/2008 dated 04.08.2008. The Respondents filed an Appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). He has held as under:- "As seen from copies of the contract, which contracts are more or less common to in both the cases, the price of the goods indicated there under is based on the dry metric tones of the exported iron ore fines. Thus the values of the iron ore fines for each shipment have to be determined in terms of the contracts not on the weight of the wet quantities of the goods exported but after determining the weight on the dry quantities. The lower authority erred in not doing so even though specifical .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... importer on dry weigt based quantity only. Therefore, he submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) was correct in arriving at the value based on Dry weight basis. He further submits that the issue is no more res integra. He relies on the following case law:- (i) Commr. of Customs (Port), Kolkata Vs Sesa Goa Ltd. 2014 (307) E.L.T. 385 (Tri.-Kolkata) (ii) Commr. of Customs (Port), Kolkata Vs. Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. 2018 (362) E. L. T. 782 (Tri.-Kolkata) (iii) Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. V. Commissioner-2018 (362) E. L. T. A 210 (S.C.) 5. He submits that the case law of UOI Vs. Gangadhar Narsingdas Agarwal [1997 (89) ELT 19 (SC)] relied upon by the Revenue in their Grounds of Appeal was duly considered in the case of Sesa Goa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Learned Advocate are yet to reach finality. Hence, they cannot be applied to the present case. 9. Heard both sides and perused the documents. 10. Admittedly there is no dispute to the fact that the Respondent has provided the copy of the Agreement with the overseas importer wherein, it is specified that the Respondent will be paid based on the dry matric weight of the iron ore. 11. This Tribunal in the case of Sesa Goa Ltd. cited supra has held as under:- 5. Rebutting the contention of the Revenue, ld. CA for the Respondent submitted that the reliance placed by the Department on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI v. Gangadhar Narsingdas Agarwal (supra) is misplaced, inasmuch as the said judgment was deliver .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the ld. CA for the respondent that the said judgment is inapplicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. In the result, Revenue's appeals filed on this issue is devoid of merit. Accordingly, ld. Commissioner (Appeals') Order to this extent is upheld. Consequently, Revenue's appeals are dismissed. [Emphasis Supplied] 12. This Tribunal in the case of Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. cited supra has held as under:- 5. We find that this Tribunal had already decided the issue of determination of duty of export goods, namely, Iron Ore Fines, and observed that for the period after 1-1-2009, the said goods be assessed to duty adopting the FOB Price, vide Order Nos. FO/A/71188- 71218/2013, dated 12-12-2013 and later followed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... en stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. As such, it cannot be said that the impugned orders of the authorities below suffer from illegality or impropriety. As such, we find no merits in the Revenue's appeal. The same is rejected. [Emphasis supplied] 14. This decision has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. - 2016 (335) E.L.T. A221 (S.C.) 15. The Chennai Tribunal in the case of Commr. of Cus. (Airport), Chennai Vs. Kothari Sugars & Chemical Ltd.-2008 (230) E.L.T. 284 (Tri. - Chennai) has held as under:- 5. After giving careful consideration to the submissions, I find that the ruling of the Apex Court in Oswal Agro Mills (supra) was followed by the Tribunal in the case of Aristo Sp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates