Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2013 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (10) TMI 856 - AT - CustomsDemand - Differential duty - LME price - Held that:- demands have been confirmed on the basis of publication of mineral and metal review which is a publication and reports of imports of aluminium scrap on various ports in India based on the import data provided by the customs department, the appellant prepared a comparative chart in respect of the imports that has not been considered by the adjudicating authority. In fact the adjudicating authority has to consider the data of the contemporaneous imports of aluminium scrap on various ports as per the worksheet prepared by the appellant which has not been done in this case. Therefore, demand on account of contemporaneous imports is not sustainable. Demand based on the argument that the price of these goods should be fixed at 65% of LME price for zinc is not consistent with laws and common sense. This formula does not take into account the fact that the Appellants were not manufacturing prime metal zinc for which price is quoted on LME. it does not take into account any processing cost or profit margin. It does not take into account the actual contents of zinc in the impugned goods and the form in which such zinc is present. It is also seen that the statement recorded under Section 108 accepts undervaluation of a few consignments only and not all consignments - Following decision of Sonia Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs, Amritsar [2011 (3) TMI 1268 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI] - Decided in favour of assessee.
|