9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1298X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Lust Voyage INC, UK for aggregate price of USD 6,956,586. The MOA was subsequently amended. On importation, they filed a Bill of Entry. The assessment was provisional. The appellants deposited the amount assessed. Subsequently, adjudication order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner, modifying the assessable value. The main issue involved in this case is reference to division of cost for beaching and whether the tug charges are includible for assessment over and above the contract price. The Commissioner (Appeals) while partly allowing the Order-in-Original observed as follows : "3.4 Since the delivery was given by the seller at the point of anchorage, the CIF price charged in the invoice has to be taken up to that point only; it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this was evident from the correspondence entered into by the appellant with the seller. The expenses towards DTA were paid by the appellant on behalf of the seller and the same have since been reimbursed. Relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Garden Silk Mills v. UOI as reported in 1999 (113) E.L.T. 358 (S.C.), the import of goods will commence when the same cross the territorial waters of India and is completed when the goods become a part of the mass of the goods within the country, the appellants contended that it was after import was complete that the vessel drifted away and expenses had to be incurred to beach it. The expenses incurred subsequent to the import cannot be treated as to be the charges towards ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... livery at the time and place of importation and inclusive of all costs, charges and expenses to be incurred or actually incurred by the seller for effecting the delivery at the place of importation and nothing further can be added as is clear from the provisions of Section 14 of Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd. v. CCE as reported in 2004 (174) E.L.T. 344 covers the same issue. It is held that "(a) The charges incurred, subsequent in time to and place to an order passed under the provisions of Section 47 of the Customs Act, 1962 cannot be added to value under Section 14. (b) Barge/lighterage charges incurred on barges/lighter vessels, when they move within the same port area from the foreign ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
