9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ATA Carnet for the purpose of exhibition at Auto Expo. After exhibition, they obtained permission to sell the cars to the appellant from the Government on 9.4.2002. Bills of Entry No.86, 87 & 88 all dated 20.5.2002 were filed. The value declared on the Bills of Entry was substantially lower than that on the Carnet document. The adjudicating authority ordered the assessable value to be taken as Carnet price + Insurance +Freight + Landing Charges. Before the Commissioner (Appeals) the appellant also pleaded that since their case is under investigation by SVB Mumbai in respect of other cars imported, the lower authority ought to have permitted provisional clearance after acceptance of 1% Revenue deposit. However their pleas were rejected and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns made by both sides. 7. We find that goods imported under ATA Caret are allowed duty free in terms of Notification No. 157/90-Cus dated 28.3.1990. Normally, the goods have to be exported within six months. But during the relevant time sale of such goods was permitted on payment of Customs duty with prior approval of the Government of India. This permission was obtained by the appellant who had bought the cars from M/s. Daimler Chrysler AG, Germany who initially imported the cars under ATA Carnet. The question which arises is what value is to be taken for purposes of assessment to duty on the sale of the cars. The department has relied on the value declared in the Carnet. But the Carnet Form, which acts as a substitute for Bill of Entry a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we cannot agree with Revenue. Valuation under Section 14 clearly provides that the value shall be the transaction value where the buyer and seller are not related. In the present case even though buyer and seller are related it is established by the SVB order that the price has not influenced the relationship. Therefore, the transaction value cannot be rejected. Revenue rejected the transaction value on the basis that the value declared in the Carnet is much higher. We find that Rule 8(2)(iii) of the Valuation Rules which provides for residual method of determining the value clearly states that no value shall be determined on the basis of the price of the goods on the domestic market of the country of exportation. In the present case the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
