TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 698X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... determined by the designated authority in the Final Notification in anti-dumping matter. It would be seen from the comments that rough entries were made and they cannot be considered towards payment received from imports. It needs to be noted that Rakesh of Aakruti Impex is an Indian buyer and Ajit Kumar Jain has maintained receipt and payment from him in Rupees with exchange rates of RMB and USD for rough estimation. Aakruti Impex is the only buyer of offset printing plate imported by Barfo Impex under the seven Bills of Entry and sold under 22 VAT invoices. The contention of the appellant, therefore, is that the local rough estimates of Rakesh of Aakruti Impex made in foreign exchange were for rough business estimation only and they cannot be considered towards payment made to overseas supplier, more particularly when the value of the imported goods is comparable to the contemporaneous imports and the value indicated in the Final Anti-Dumping Notification dated 15.05.2020. Hence, it is not possible to accept the contention of the department that the transaction value was required to be rejected as the rough registers indicated some additional consideration, apart from the banking ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of under valuation but the demand based on incorrect classification has been dropped upholding the classification of imported goods under CTI 8442 50 39. The rejection of transaction value is based on the kaccha/rough entries found in the rough registers gathered by the investigating agency. 7. Searches were conducted at the office premises of the appellant firm and the residential premises of Sourabh Jain, proprietor of the appellant film on 12.10.2017 and certain documents, including kacha parchi were resumed. Search was also conducted at the shop cum office premises of M/s. Vardhaman Automobiles, wherein it was learnt that it was a proprietorship firm of Ajit Kumar Jain and that almost the whole quantity of goods (auto parts), imported by the appellant firm were sold to M/s. Vardhaman Automobiles. As a follow up to the investigation, a search was also conducted at M/s. Aakruti Impex, which is the buyer of the aluminum offset plates from the appellant and the sale and purchase records for 2016-17 and 2017-18, ledger, transporter details in respect of goods purchased from the appellant were resumed. 8. The department, on the basis of the entries, particularly contained in documen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s made in the three show cause notices. 11. The Principal Commissioner dropped the demands regarding mis-classification of the goods, but confirmed the demand relating to under valuation. The main findings of the Principal Commissioner are: (i) The goods imported by the appellant are appropriately classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 8442; (ii) The documents at serial No‟s. 5, 13 and 14 are relevant documents, based on which the value can be re-determined. The entries are cleared and, therefore, cannot be brushed aside as rough estimate/ calculations; (iii) The entries are nothing but payments made to the overseas supplier, i.e. Bocica China and Bocica Hong Kong, either by Sourabh Jain or the sole buyer, M/s Aakruti Impex. They are additional payments made to the suppliers in respect of imports of positive offset plates of aluminium from them; (iv) In view of the decision in Carpenter Classic Exim Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore 2006 (200) E.L.T. 539 (Tri.-Bang.) and Shah Guman Mal vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1631 (S.C.) , the evidence relied upon by the department is sufficient to establish that the appellant undervalued the imported go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of the impugned goods from the importer. This cannot be brushed aside as a rough estimate/ calculation as claimed by the appellant; (iv) The entries made in document No. V, include the name of the overseas supplier, the person's name, the amount in currency, and details of the container; (v) Similarly document No. XIII and document No. XIV reflect payment of the amount paid to overseas suppliers through a few persons/agents on various dates during the period 04.10.2016 to 31.08.2017; (vi) The re-determination of the assessable value was not merely taken on the basis of rough estimates, but it was supported by the financial transactions of the importer; and (vii) In view of the evidence unearthed/recovered reflecting undisclosed payments, the values declared in impugned seven Bills of Entry filed by the importer are liable for rejection in terms of rule 12 of the 2007 Valuation Rules, read with section 14 of the Customs Act. 15. The submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned special counsel appearing for the department have been considered. 16. The issue involved in these appeals relates to under valuation of the imported goods. The departmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Act provides that the transaction value of goods shall be the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to India where the buyer and the seller of the goods are not related and the price is the sole consideration for the sale, subject to such other conditions as may be specified in the rules made in this behalf. The Valuation Rules have been framed in exercise of the powers conferred by section 14 of the Customs Act. 19. Rule 12 of the 2007 Valuation Rules deals with rejection of the declared value and is reproduced below: Rule 12. Rejection of declared value. - (1) When the proper officer has reason to doubt the truth or accuracy of the value declared in relation to any imported goods, he may ask the importer of such goods to furnish further information including documents or other evidence and if, after receiving such further information, or in the absence of a response of such importer, the proper officer still has reasonable doubt about the truth or accuracy of the value so declared, it shall be deemed that the transaction value of such imported goods cannot be determined under the provisions of sub-rule(1) of rule 3. (2) At the request of an importer, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not subject to some condition or consideration for which a value cannot be determined in respect of the goods being valued; (c) no part of the proceeds of any subsequent resale, disposal or use of the goods by the buyer will accrue directly or indirectly to the seller, unless an appropriate adjustment can be made in accordance with the provisions of rule 10 of these rules; and (d) the buyer and seller are not related, or where the buyer and seller are related, that transaction value is acceptable for customs purposes under the provisions of sub-rule (3) below: (3) xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx (4) If the value cannot be determined under the provisions of sub-rule (1), the value shall be determined by proceeding sequentially through rule 4 to 9. 21. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the contemporaneous price of the imported goods are comparable to the declared value of the imported goods in the Bills of Entry. 22. The seven Bills of Entry cover the period from 27.01.2017 to 01.09.2017. According to the appellant similar goods were imported during the same time by other importers and were assessed at USD 2.05 to USD 2.98 depending upon the quality of the plates. Detail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g tangible evidence. In this connection, placed reliance upon the decisions of the Tribunal in Good Kare Medico Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C. Ex., Meerut 2019 (366) E.L.T. 133 (Tri. - All.) and Commissioner of C. Ex., Ahmedabad vs. Durolam Ltd 2007 (212) E.L.T. 419 (Tri. Ahmd.) . The contention is that rough registers can have no evidentiary value and, therefore, the impugned order deserves to be set aside since it is based merely on a few selective entries of the rough registers. 27. The appellant is justified in contending that the entries in rough notebooks cannot be made the sole basis for determining the valuation unless there is corroborative/supporting tangible evidence. 28. In Good Kare Medico the Tribunal observed as follows: 6. It is seen that apart from the said rough entries made in the two sheets, there is virtually no other evidence to establish that the appellant manufactured and cleared their final products in a clandestine manner. Even Vinod Kumar has disputed the fact that the said entries were in his hand writing. In any case we note that there is no evidence of receipt of excess raw material, there conversion into final products and there clearance to the ide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not connected with the actual payment. Ajit Kumar Jain also stated that the entries were rough estimates of business and that they did not indicate the payment made. He further stated that they were only rough calculations or quotations given to parties, who came for business from China and that is why the entries are either in Chinese currency or US currency. Rakesh Shah in his statement also supported the submission that the entries in the rough registers were not actual payments and the payments were only made through banking channels. 34. Paragraph 33 of the order dated 06.01.2020 passed by the Principal Commissioner refers to 33 entries in Note Books. They are as follows: Note Book No. Total Number of entries picked Book No. V 4 Book No. XIII 17 Book No. XIV 12 35. The appellant has provided a Chart containing the description of the entries and the comments for Book No. V, Book No. XIV, Book No. XIII. 36. It would be seen from the comments that rough entries were made and they cannot be considered towards payment received from imports. It needs to be noted that Rakesh of Aakruti Impex is an Indian buyer and Ajit Kumar Jain has maintained receipt and payment from him in Rupees ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
