TMI Blog2007 (1) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imported electrical and other consumable items on the basis of the value declared in the invoice dated 20-3-2003. The finding recorded in Paras 3- 8 are reproduced herein below:- '3. In the grounds of appeal, the appellants have stated that the Department did not adhere to the procedure prescribed in Rule 3 of the Customs Valuation Rules in rejecting the transaction value. The procedure prescribed under Rule 10A was not carried out. Since prices of identical models of VCD were not available, prices of similar models imported at Madras were relied upon. Ultimately, the lower authority enhanced the assessable value of the goods after rejecting the same based on certain prices, which were downloaded from the internet. Also confiscation of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the declared price. The appellant relied upon the invoice price at the time of hearing. They stated that in case one accepts the proposed valuation by the Customs, then the retail price of the goods will be around Rs.9,000/- per piece, at which price the goods cannot be sold. The lower authority has observed that the contemporaneous imports of identical models of VCDs are not available but the prices of similar models imported at Madras are available. The lower authority also observed that the prices of similar models of VCDs downloaded from internet indicate the price as US $ 25.99 i.e. Rs.7,564/- and therefore, rejected the declared value of the goods on that basis and fixed the value of the imported VCD at Rs.4,414/- per piece also tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the assessable value of the goods imported. The imports are not from the same countries in two cases. Therefore, the assessment under Rule 6 by the lower authority was incorrect in law. Thus, such re-fixation of value is unsustainable and is set aside. in view of this, the goods are liable to be assessed to duty at the declared price. 7. In view of the fact that the goods are to be assessed to duty on the declared price, there is no question of confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty. Even otherwise, this is not a case where the value of the goods was mis-declared by the appellant as being something different from the price at which the goods had been purchased. Merely because the department sought to enhance value of the goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich price the goods cannot be sold. The Commissioner (A) has noted that as the price of electrical goods vary from day to day, it is not permissible in law to adopt the import price of similar models, since the goods imported at Chennai had different configuration as those imported by the appellants. He has also rioted that the import price of the electrical goods vary very much from passage of time. He also noted the judgments which are already extracted supra. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned order, there was no contemporaneous price of similar models available with the department. The cited judgment of Vikas Spinners (supra) relied by learned JDR is distinguishable. There is no merit in this appeal and the same is rejected. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
