Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. MCCPTA India Corporation (P) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs (Port) , Kolkata

2015 (11) TMI 1458 - CESTAT KOLKATA

Valuation - Enhancement in value - Provisional assessment - exemption Notification No.21/2002-CUS dated 01.03.2002 under Sl.No.212B, condition 28B - Held that:- On perusal of the Notification No.21/2002-CUS dated 01.03.2002 and the corresponding entry under Sl.No.212B we find that the impugned Notification does not cover the Palladium metal and therefore we hold that the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) has rightly held that the benefit of the said Notification is not available to the appellant and the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Per Dr. I.P. Lal. 1. Instant appeal is filed against the order-in-Appeal dated 19.2.2007 passed by Commissioner of Customs(Appeals), Kolkata. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant filed bill of entry No.112658 dated 26.10.2004 for clearance of Palladium Catalyst (re-processed) from manufacturer M/s.N.E. Chemical Corporation, Japan at the declared value comprising of the value for extraction, conversion charges (as charged by manufacturer) and insurance and freight charge .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

judication and deside the case after following the provisions of Customs Valuation Rules 1988. The adjudicating authority again rejected the declared value under Rule 10(A) of CVR 1988 and re-determined the value under Rule 6 read with Rule 8 of the CVR 1988 on the basis of contemporary import by the same supplier at Japanese Yen 5462.40 per kg. Being aggrieved the appellant preferred the appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals). The ld.Commissioner(Appeals) upheld the order passed by the adju .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

arriving at value should be adopted in the same manner. He however fairly agrees that the impugned notification does not cover the import of reprocessed Palladium. 4. As per contra the ld.A.R. for the Revenue submits that the aforesaid notification covers only the zinc metal and therefore the benefit of the same cannot be extended in the instant case, as the metal in question is Palladium and not zinc. He submits that the wording of the Notification cannot be stretched to give the benefit to an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is in excess of the amount calculated at the rate specified in the corresponding entry in column 4 of the said table. It further exempts by imported goods from so much of the additional duty leviable thereon as in excess of rate specified in column 5 of the said table subject to any of the conditions specified in column 6 of the said table. The condition No.28B provides that if Zinc metal is imported within one year or the date of export of zinc concentrate out of India and sufficient evidence e .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version