TMI Blog1992 (7) TMI 175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g and processing machine with micro processor based system with standard accessories. They declared the value at Rs. 2,78,792 under bill of entry dated 8-8-1984. The appellants claimed clearance of goods under OGL. They claimed assessment under the Customs Act under Heading No. 84.66. The appellant firm is solely owned by Shri Gordhan B. Dandwani, who is a non-resident Indian residing abroad. He has decided to start his own industrial unit and that the industrial unit is registered with local State Government authority as SSI unit. He was maintaining his non-resident external account No. 640 with the Central Bank of India. He brought foreign currency equivalent to Indian Rs. 2,89,382.75. He made the payment for the imported goods by drawing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8-1984 wherein they stated that However, in order to expedite the earlier clearance and to save demurrage charges which have already been incurred very heavily, we are not insisting at this stage for the inspection of the documents likely to be relied upon by the Department. We take it the copies of the same will be furnished to us even after the adjudication for the purposes of any action which my client deem fit to see thereafter. In the letter dated 1-8-1984, it is mentioned My client also understands that the Custom House has proposed the enhancement of the value declared by him in the Bill of Entry. My client has not been given any reasons for such proposed enhancement of the value declared in the Bill of Entry. My client says and s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce quoted in the telex is 13,80,2931 Japan Yen. It is not clear whether the item quoted in the telex message is similar to the imported goods as there is no technical material stating that 501-D-009B is similar to QSS 501D. Further, there is no evidence that the goods were actually imported in pursuance of the offer in this telex message. The impugned goods were imported in January, 1984 whereas the telex relates to September 19, 1983, and there are no contemporary imports up to January, 1984, the date of actual import. In our view, the telex message cannot be relied upon for the purpose of enhancing the value of goods imported not only because the model is different but also there is a difference of 4 months between telex message and the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be in accordance with Section 14(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. We have already held that telex message cannot be relied upon as evidence of a contemporary import at higher price. Therefore, the appellants are not precluded from challenging the assessable value. We may also refer to judgment of Supreme Court in Dunlop India Ltd. and Others v. Union of India and Others reported in AIR 1977 Supreme Court 597 = 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1566 (S.C.) wherein it was held :- There is no estoppel in law against a party in taxation matter. If a party, in order to clear the goods for customs, has given the classification in accordance with the wishes of the authorities or even under some misapprehension, and if the law allows it a right to ask for refund o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
