TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (1) TMI 248
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellants declared a value of Rs. 1,06,160/-. The Customs after due process enhanced the value to Rs. 2,13,841.78 by the impugned order, and demanding duty on the enhanced value, confiscated the goods and imposed a penalty also. Hence this appeal. 2. Shri Puri, the learned Advocate for the appellants submitted that the two transistors were components for dish antenna manufactured by the appellants. He stated that these two were critical components and were manufactured by only two Units in the world, one in Japan and the other in United States of America. The present import was from the United States. The learned Advocate submitted that the United States controls the export of the transistors through a body called COCOM. 3. Shri Puri argue....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nly a part-consignment out of a total 1 lakh transistors of 3 types. He also relied on the ratio of the two judgments of this Tribunal: (i) Babcock Venkateshwara Hatcheries P. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay - 1985 (20) E.L.T. 335 (Tribunal) (ii) Weston Electroniks Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay - 1987 (29) E.L.T. 318 (Tribunal). 4. Shri Ganu, the learned SDR justifying the impugned order submitted that reliance on quotations was correctly placed and referred to the fact that in the earlier stages the appellants themselves imported identical goods at $14. He also pointed out that the price paid by A.K. Electronics was the same as the price paid earlier by the appellants and indicated in the quotations obtained by DRI. Submitti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... sight of the fact that the present importation is a much bigger one and that the appellants have placed before us copies of correspondence. 7. We perused the two quotations, photostat copies of which were placed before us by the appellants. One of these quotations is completely illegible and even the learned SDR could not place before us a readable copy. The second quotation does not clearly show as to who received it. Keeping in mind the undisputed submission that the present importation is of a monopoly item and that the sales of the item appear to be controlled, we cannot place reliance on this quotation without knowing as to who offered to supply the goods and to whom. Further, normally, a quotation is not a reliable guide to value as....