TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 26X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2002 (2) TMI 1316 - SUPREME COURT), the Hon'ble Supreme Court affirmed that duty can only be charged on the quantity received in the shore tank. The same view has been reaffirmed by Tribunal in the cases of Ruchi Infrastructure Ltd. (2007 (11) TMI 210 - CESTAT, BANGALORE) and General Foods (2008 (5) TMI 546 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD). The law as it exists clearly lays down that the value on which duty is payable will be the value of goods actually imported into the shore tanks. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. C/88721 to 88745/13 - - - Dated:- 9-2-2015 - Anil Choudhary, Member (J) And P S Pruthi, Member (T),JJ. For the Appellant : Shri G L Rawal, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri Ahibaran, Addl. Commissioner (AR) OR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NOCIL (supra). In any case, he argued that, all their assessments were made well prior to the date of Circular 6/2006 and therefore, it cannot be applied in the present case. He also stated that the Circular would apply only in cases where duty is assessed on ad valorem basis. It does not apply where duty is assessed on the basis of Tariff value as is the case in respect of goods imported by them. He relied on judgment in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Vishakhapatnam Vs. Hindustan Petroleum Co. Ltd. - 2001 (130) ELT 139 and the case of Mangalore Refinery Petrochemicals Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise - 2002 (141) ELT 247. According to him, Commissioner, Chennai had expres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis of survey carried out on Board Ship by an Independent Surveyor, are different from the quantity which was received in the shore tanks from the ship. Tribunal held in the case of NOCIL Vs. CC (I), Mumbai - 2000 (126) ELT 1072 (Tri) that the duty cannot be charged on the basis of discharge certificate from the ship. It is the quantity received in short tanks, which is to be considered for payment of import duty. This judgment of the Tribunal was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NOCIL (supra). Thereafter Board, vide Circular No. 96/2002 dated 27.12.2002, issued a clarification to the effect that in the case of Bulk Liquid Cargo, whether for home consumption or for warehousing, the shore tank receipt quantity is t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Customs (Imports) F.No. S/58/154/2006/APPG (Min.) dated 14.9.2006 on which the learned Counsel is relying is merely a view expressed to his Chief Commissioner and is not a Trade Notice to be necessarily followed by Trade and Departmental officers. 6.2 The learned Counsel had also raised the argument that the Board Circular of 2006 cannot be applied retrospectively. We note that the issue in the present case is to be decided on the basis of law and the question of retrospective application of the Circular does not arise. 6.3 For a legal examination of the issue at hand, we may go back to the provision of law. Duty under the Customs Act is charged under Section12. The rates of duty are specified under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lue of such or like goods, and where any such tariff values are fixed, the duty shall be chargeable with reference to such tariff value. .. Section 14(1) says that the value of imported goods shall be the transaction value of such goods ...............when sold for export to India for delivery at the time and place of importation. Thus it is the transaction value i.e. invoice value which is relevant in normal case. However, Section 14(2) deals with the goods for which tariff values are fixed as in the present case. By fixing of tariff value, there is no option left with the assessing officer but to consider the tariff value fixed per unit quantity. Further, for determining the duty payable, the ad valorem rate of duty applicable is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only mean that the moment goods have entered the territorial waters, the import is complete. We do not agree with the submission. This Court in its opinion in Re. The Bill to Amend Section 20 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 and Section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, 1964 (3) SCR 787 at page 823 observed as follows : Truly speaking, the imposition of an import duty, by and large, results in a condition which must be fulfilled before the goods can be brought inside the customs barriers i.e. before they form part of the mass of goods within the country. It would appear to us that the import of goods into India would commence when the same cross into the territorial waters but continues and is completed when the goods become ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
