TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 80X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the value to Rs. 63,87,580/- (FOB) on the basis of the price obtained from Internet, in terms of Rule 10A of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988. The SCN further proposed to confiscate the goods under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act and impose personal penalty on the importer under Section 112 of the Act. The party contested the proposals and was heard, on the dispute, by the Commissioner on 7-7-99. Subsequently, however, the department obtained a price list dated 7-4-99 (relating to January, 1999) from the Italian manufacturers/suppliers of the goods viz. FLORENCE Sculpture d'arte, and wanted to enhance the value on the basis of that list, giving up the Internet prices. Hence an addendum to the SCN was issued to the importer on 30-9-99. The party did not reply to it, nor did they appear before the Commissioner for being heard in the matter. When the matter was still pending with the adjudicating authority, the party, through their Consultant, requested that authority to take into account the Supreme Court's ruling in Eicher Tractors Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai [2000 (122) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.)] while determining the assessable val ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 's price list of January, 1999 was not contemporaneous for the goods imported and the stock lot of '611' sculptures imported was not substantially in the same quantity and the goods were not of comparable quality and customer appeal, (v) The valuation law laid down by the Supreme Court in Eicher Tractors case was not followed by the adjudicating authority and (vi) After ruling out the applicability of Rules 4 to 8, the only course open to the Commissioner was to take recourse to Rule 11, which was not done. It is contended that the goods did not fall under any of the exceptions in Rule 4(2) and hence the transaction value could have been determined only under Rule 4(1) read with Section 14(1) of the Customs Act. It is pointed out that the SCN or the addendum thereto had not alleged existence of any exceptional circumstances to attract the provisions of Rule 4(2). The invoiced price was the actual price payable for the goods and hence the transaction value. The appellants have prayed for acceptance of that value under Rule 4(1). 3. Heard both sides. Ld. Consultant for the appellants submitted that the '611' pieces of statues imported by them were made of low cost material vi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plea for acceptance of the invoiced price of the goods. It appears that the Commissioner has rejected all arguments advanced against the price list and accepted those prices as discounted in terms of the Discount Schedule attached to the price list. As regards the invoice price, the Commissioner has not chosen to examine its merits as he did not accept it as a genuine document. He has also not considered the Apex Court's judgment. The Commissioner has only acted short of what he was meant to accomplish under the remand order. Conversely, while reserving (for the moment) our decision on the legality and propriety of the view taken by the Commissioner in relation to the invoice, we hold that he has not acted in excess of the terms of our remand order. 4.2 The appellants had produced two photocopies of the import invoice on two different occasions. They produced what was claimed to be the original, later. The Commissioner has found certain "discrepancies" between the original and its copies. One "discrepancy" is that the description 'Prodotti artistici in caolino e resina decorati a mano Goods of Italian origin' appears in three lines in the original invoice whereas it is in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntity. The covering letter for the said price list had clarified that the January, 1999 price list was valid upto December, 1999 only, which meant that the manufacturer intended to revise the prices of their products w.e.f. January, 2000. Apparently the manufacturer used to revise price from year to year and therefore the January, 1999 prices were not meant to be applied to the goods exported by them in September, 1998. The covering letter for the January, 1999 price list lays down the manufacturer's terms relating to trade discount, payment, minimum order, delivery etc. The trade discount, for instance, is 50%. These terms are, expressly, their "general sales terms", which expression impliedly provides room for reduction of prices on negotiation in specific cases. The appellants have claimed that they were permitted to buy the entire stock-lot of sculptures on highly discounted prices mentioned in the invoice. The adjudicating authority has not been able to demolish this case of the appellants. It has observed that "the examination did not show that the lustre and customer appeal has been diminished over the years". How could it be said that there was no diminution of lustre and c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the price actually paid or payable, to arrive at the assessable value. Rule 10 casts an obligation on the importer to declare the details of the value of the goods accurately as also to furnish such document or information as may be required by the proper officer for determination of the assessable value. Rule 10A is extracted below :- "Rejection of declared value. - (1) When the proper officer has reason to doubt the truth or accuracy of the value declared in relation to any imported goods, he may ask the importer of such goods to furnish further information including documents or other evidence and if, after receiving such further information, or in the absence of a response of such importer, the proper officer still has reasonable doubt about the truth or accuracy of the value so declared, it shall be deemed that the value of such imported goods cannot be determined under the provisions of sub-rule (1) of rule 4. (2) At the request of an importer, the proper officer, shall intimate the importer in writing the grounds for doubting the truth or accuracy of the value declared in relation to goods imported by such importer and provide a reasonable opportunity of being he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
