TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In these circumstances, we allow the appeals with consequential relief. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing arguments. (i) In all these cases, there was no invoice for import into India. The only invoice was that issued at the time of purchase of the car in the country of use. The basis adopted for discarding the declared value are determining the assessable value is contrary to the section 14(1) of the Customs Act 1962 read with Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. In all these cases, the appellants had produced the manufacturers' certificate regarding the price of the car with various fittings. This has not been challenged. The values have been arrived at so called list price, which was not an export price and that too for export into India. The list price includes various local levies, which cannot be taken into account for determining the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... several decisions of the Tribunal but also have been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of M/s. Gajra Bevel Gears v. Commissioner of Customs - 2000 (115) E.L.T. 612 (S.C.). (v) The Supreme Court in the matter of Tolin Rubbers Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs reported in 2004 (163) E.L.T. 289 (S.C.) following its earlier decision in the matter of Eicher Tractors Ltd. has held in unequivocal terms that in respect of second-hand goods Rule 8 is not applicable. (vi) The Circuit Bench at Cochin in the matter of Bala Krishna Pillai v. Commissioner of Customs, reported in 2003 (156) E.L.T. 414 (T) has held that sales need not be at list prices. A long standing practice is no ground to adopt a method of valuation contrary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|