9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (4) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hancement of the goods at US $ 325 per piece. The DRI on enquiries found that M/s. ETA General Pvt. Ltd., Chennai in collaboration with M/s. Fujitsu General, Japan had sent a price list of O' General Air Conditioners effective from 4-6-2000 as 1400 Dirhams per piece Ex-Dubai which works out to US $ 380 per piece. On the basis of this evidence, the Department issued show cause notice to enhance the value of the imported O' General Air Conditioners from the declared value of US $ 150 CIF to US $ 380. The Commissioner has in the impugned order rejected the transaction value in terms of Section 14 of the Act and has proceeded to value under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules. He has also ordered for confiscation of the 96 pieces of O' Genera ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot contemporaneous in nature. (iv) Further reference is made to United Traders India v. CC, Chennai [2003 (159) E.L.T. 684 (T) = 2003 (56) RLT 663] wherein also the similar proposition has been laid down. The Counsel has filed detailed tabulated citations with a gist of the rulings, which is noted herein below: - (a) Mark Auto Industries Ltd. v. CC, New Delhi [2003 (162) E.L.T. 261 (T) = 2003 (57) RLT 495] Assessable Value - Section 14 of Customs Act, 1962 - Transaction value - Rejection of transaction value on basis of import of identical goods by another person from same supplier at higher price is not valid as transaction value may be different depending on various factors - Lower transaction value for higher quality u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment of goods and value declared allowed - Section 14 of Customs Act, 1962. (e) Eicher Tractors Ltd. v. CC, Mumbai [2000 (122) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.)] Valuation (Customs) - Transaction value, how to be determined - Subject to three conditions laid down in Section 14(1) of Customs Act, 1962 of time, place and absence of special circumstances, price of imported goods is to be determined under Section 14(1A) in accordance with the Customs Valuation (Determination of price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988 - The "special circumstances" have been statutorily particularized in Rule 4(2) and in the absence of these exceptions it is mandatory for customs to accept the Price actually paid or payable for the goods in the particular transaction - "P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lue not to be enhanced on the basis of quotation of price and statement of appellant about import at quoted price when it is retracted, quotation is of doubtful nature and no other evidence of real value is brought on record by Revenue - Appeal allowed. Statement - Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962 - Retraction - Of confessional statement made in reply to show cause notice - Not to be rejected as an 'after thought' when acceptable evidence of undervaluation has not been brought on record by investigating authority. (i) Commissioner v. Plama Laboratories Ltd. [2002 (145) E.L.T. 722 (T) = 2002 (49) RLT 198] Assessable Value - Section 14 of Customs Act, 1962 - Comparable goods - Transaction value - Enhanced by taking price of simila ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ms Act, 1962. 3.Ld. JCDR submitted that the appellant had admitted for enhancement of the value and therefore the Department can on such admission enhance the value of the goods. She submitted that in the case of CC, Bombay v. Shibani Engg. Systems [1996 (86) E.L.T. 453 (S.C.)], the Apex Court upheld the order of the Collector rejecting transaction value of the goods plainly on the ground that it was totally unrealistic value. Therefore, the Department have not enhanced the value on mere basis of imports made by the Japan company. She further relied on the judgment in the case of Pan Asia Enterprises v. CC, Bombay [1995 (79) E.L.T. 322] wherein the quotation of identical goods of same specification produced in same country of origin by sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... admission and stated that the valuation adopted by the Revenue is not comparable with the goods imported from Dubai of Thailand origin. The Department is attempting to compare goods with goods of Japanese origin. In terms of Section 14, the goods are required to be identical, imported at the same time and from same place. The evidence recorded by the Revenue is totally not of the same scope/brand, quantity, country of origin, place of import and the commercial level of transaction is totally different. The appellant has rightly relied on large number of judgments which is noted supra wherein it has been well laid down that transaction value cannot be rejected without clear evidence produced by the Revenue with regard to same goods, same qua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
