TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 580X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... D THAT:- Valuation of the goods are to be done in terms of Rule 7 of CVR, 2007. The worksheet showing the deductive value of the impugned spare parts as prepared by the appellant has been accepted as correct and only the heads for which deduction has to be allowed from the unit sale price before arriving at the transaction value is disputed. The heads of expenses disputed are employee cost, rent, repairs and maintenance and office miscellaneous expenses are deductible as per Rule 7 of CVR, 2007. The reason that the said heads are found to be not eligible for deduction in the impugned order is that these are post importation expenses which are internal expenses of the importer and hence cannot be deducted while arriving at the transaction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. Sea C. Cus. II No. 340/2019 dated 25.4.2019. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant had registered with Special Valuation Branch for their imports from M/s. Heidelberger Drukmaschinen AG, Germany, that the invoice value was accepted as transaction value by the department since 2001 and the order was periodically renewed which was valid till 1.4.2016; that the department consequent to a Review Order dated 24.6.2013 filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) to remand the case back to the lower adjudicating authority to examine the records and evidences; that the Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the case back to the lower adjudicating authority vide Order in Appeal No. 1551/2014 dated 26.8.2014; that the lower adjudica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Harish Bindumadhavan learned counsel for the appellant submitted the transaction value should not have been rejected merely because the Appellant and the exporter are related and that the said goods are imported by third-parties at a higher rate. The onus to prove that the relationship did influence the price of the imported goods by the Appellant is on the Department as held in the case of M/S Marcus Oils Chemicals P. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata, [2020 (12) TMI 804 -CESTAT KOLKATA]. The said burden has not been discharged in the instant case. He submitted that the difference in the price of imports by third parties and that of the Appellant is due to the variation in the commercial levels, the line of business ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transaction value is compared with values transaction with other third-parties as per Rule 3(3)(b) of the Valuation Rules, the commercial level and the quantity level is to be considered and the same has not been done in the instant case. In support of the above submission, reliance is placed on the following cases: a. Komet Precision Tolls India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commr. Of Cus., Bangalore, 2009 (245) E.L.T. 737 (Tri.-Bang.) b. Rehau Polymers Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Cus. 2014 (301) E.L.T. 116 (Tri.- Mumbai) c. Richemont India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi, 2016 (343) E.L.T. 209 (Tri.-Del.) He prayed that the impugned Order be set aside and the Appeal allowed. 4.2 Shri Harendra Singh Pal learned AR for the R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the deductive value of the impugned spare parts as prepared by the appellant has been accepted as correct and only the heads for which deduction has to be allowed from the unit sale price before arriving at the transaction value is disputed. The heads of expenses disputed are employee cost, rent, repairs and maintenance and office miscellaneous expenses are deductible as per Rule 7 of CVR, 2007. The reason that the said heads are found to be not eligible for deduction in the impugned order is that these are post importation expenses which are internal expenses of the importer and hence cannot be deducted while arriving at the transaction value using the deductive method. 6. Rule 7 of the CVR, 2007 which is relevant to deciding the disp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inistrative Overheads) and 15 (Standard on selling and distribution overheads), which show that the above-mentioned expenses are costs/ general expenses incurred by the Appellant in connection with their sale and distribution business. 9. We find that Rule 7 of CVR 2007, permits deductions of additions usually made for profits and general expenses in connection with sales in India of imported goods of the same class or kind. Note 7 to Rule 7 of The Schedule to CVR 2007 (Interpretative Notes) states as under; 7. The general expenses include the direct and indirect costs of marketing the goods in question This legal position sets to naught the stand taken in the impugned order that post importation expenses which are internal exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
