Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 1768 - CESTAT MUMBAIValuation of imported goods - trailer parts viz. wheel rims, axle, suspension, etc. - goods was assessed provisionally as the proper officer intended to compute the levy of additional duties of customs by adoption of the ‘maximum retail price.’ - applicability of Packaged Commodity Rules, 1977 to the goods that are not pre-packaged - HELD THAT:- It is apparent from Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 that no provision exists for ascertainment of ‘retail sale price’ in the same manner as provided for in Section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944. The purpose of Section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944 has been clearly articulated when it was incorporated in the statute. On the other hand, Section 3 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 was intended to ensure that the valuation adopted for customs purpose, would have to conform to the price at which the goods are intended to be sold in packages that are statutorily required to carry such prices on them. Hence a declaration of ‘retail sale price’ would suffice for acceptance as value for computation of additional duties of customs. The respondent herein has taken a position that the goods are not required, under the provisions of Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 or the Rules made thereunder, to declare so on the packages of import. There is, therefore, no provision for determination of retail sale price in the event of disagreement by the proper officer of customs with the declaration - in the absence of declaration of retail sale price, the adoption of another price by the proper officer of customs does not constitute the appropriate assessment - there are no merits in the appeal of Revenue - appeal dismissed.
|