9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (8) TMI 228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The appellant filed this appeal against order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the activity of ship breaking. The appellant entered into an agreement for purchase of a ship MV 'HERMAE'. Memo of Agreement dated 28-6-1999 is for the purchase of above-mentioned vessel at the total price of US $ 529,402.33 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that there is no quarrel with the proposition that the price mentioned in the addendum is the price at the time of importation. The contention is that after deciding the issue in this way the Commissioner only rejected the price reduced on the ground that the appellant had not produced any evidence to show that there was any deficiency in the vessel which is to be considered for reduction in price ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted the factual position and the legal position by saying that price mentioned in the addendum dated 12-7-1999 is the price at the time of importation and there is no quarrel with the aforesaid proposition. We find thereafter the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the price as per addendum dated 12-7-1999 on the ground that the appellant failed to show that there was any deficiency in the vessel as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In the original Memo of Agreement it was mentioned only of aluminium with wood in cabins. The Tribunal in the case of Atam Manohar Ship Breakers relied upon by the appellant specifically held that valuation could not be insisted on the original price and the price at the time of importation is to be considered as the value for assessment of the imported goods. In the present case as the addendum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
