9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 691X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... transaction value declared by the appellant M/s. Armstrong World Industries (I) Pvt. Ltd., in respect of imports undertaken by them from the related foreign entity M/s. Worthington Armstrong Metal Product Co. (Shanghai) Ltd., China, has not been influenced by the relationship. Aggrieved of the same, the appellant is before us. 2. The learned Counsel for the appellant makes the following submissions. 2.1 The transactions of the appellant in respect of supplies received from the related foreign entity was examined at length by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, GATT Valuation Cell, Mumbai vide order dated 18/11/2011. The Assessing Officer after considering the documents submitted by the appellant came to the conclusion that the prices f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pecial discount limited to exclusive agent can be rejected as per Rule 12 (1) (iii) (c) of Customs valuation Rules, 2007. Accordingly, the transaction value has been rejected. 2.2 The learned Counsel submits that there is no reason given to rebut the findings of the assessing officer who has examined the matter and considered the value from three different angles and therefore, the impugned order is unsustainable in law. The learned Counsel relies on the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Ashland India Pvt. Ltd., vide order No. A/1064/13/CSTB/C-I dated 15/05/2013 wherein also a more or less identical issue was involved and wherein it was held that in the absence of any specific findings rebutting the claims of the importer, enhanceme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 using the deductive method from the sale price of the goods sold in India and working backwards after excluding the operative expenses and finance costs. He has observed that the net profit obtained by the appellant on sale in India is only 12.5% and therefore, the priced declared by the appellant, on the basis of deductive method, is acceptable and accordingly he has come to the conclusion that the transaction value can be accepted. The reasoning adopted by the assessing officer in his order dated 18/11/2011 is impeccable and we do not find any reason to take a different view. On the contrary, we find that the lower appellate authority has not given any reasoning as to why the transaction value cannot be accepted. The only reason given i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
