9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Determination of cost of transportation for assessable value of imported goods, consideration of transportation charges as part of freight or landing charges, interpretation of Customs Valuation Rules, applicability of charges for goods transported from one port to another, waiver of duty deposit requests.
In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai, the main issue revolved around the determination of the cost of transportation to be included in the assessable value of imported goods for two separate appeals. The first appeal was by Reliance Industries Ltd. seeking a waiver of duty deposit amounting to Rs. 13,99,41,161, while the second appeal was by Essar Steel Ltd. requesting a waiver of duty deposit of Rs. 4,21,13,645. The common question for consideration was whether the costs incurred for transporting the goods from the ship to the jetty should be considered as part of the freight or as landing charges. The Commissioner had previously held that these transportation costs should be included in the freight. The appellants argued that based on a previous Tribunal decision, these charges should be classified as landing charges and not part of the cost of transportation. The appellants contended that the charges for transporting goods from the ship to the jetty should not be considered as part of the cost of transportation, citing the Customs Valuation Rules which provide for specific landing charges. They argued that any further addition to these charges was unjustified. Additionally, they highlighted cases where goods were transported from the anchorage to another port, stating that the normal price should already include the ordinary freight payable, regardless of the destination port. The departmental representative, however, argued that the cost of transport should include charges for delivery up to the anchorage, although he failed to prove that the goods were transhipped outside the port limits of Hajira. The Tribunal referred to a previous case involving Ispat Industries Ltd. and Customs Valuation Rules, indicating that costs for transporting goods within the port of importation should be considered as landing charges and not part of the cost of transportation. The Tribunal's prima facie view was that once goods arrived at the port of importation, any further transport or handling within the port should not be classified as part of the cost of transportation. The term "place of importation" was interpreted to extend to the customs station area where the goods are imported, aligning with the provisions of Section 14 of the Act. Another debated issue was the charges for goods transported from one port to another, particularly from Magdala to Mumbai. The Tribunal acknowledged the debatable nature of this issue, suggesting that such transportation costs could be considered part of the overall cost of transportation. However, the Tribunal decided to waive the duty deposit for Essar Steel Ltd. based on the limited instances of transport to Mumbai, subject to a bank guarantee. For Reliance Industries Ltd., the Tribunal required the continuation of existing bank guarantees and an additional guarantee, also waiving the duty deposit subject to compliance with the stay order. The appeals were scheduled for a hearing on a specified date.
|
