9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .20/-. On scrutiny of import documents, it appeared to the Revenue that the date of invoice was 14/05/2012 whereas, date of bill of lading was 18/03/2012;a price quoted in invoice was USD 8156.50 PMT, whereas, as per the price prevailing on the date of bill of lading was USD 8766.975 PMT on London Metal Exchange (LME). Accordingly, the importer/appellant was asked to justify the variation in the price; under the reasonable belief that the declared value was not correct; the value was liable to be rejected under Rule 12 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007. On compilation of the proceedings, after according a personal hearing, Learned Commissioner: 1. Confiscated the impugned goods under Section 111(M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant is a regular importer and the supplier is a renowned dealer. 4. Learned Counsel submits that sub-clause (iii) of Clause(i) of the Explanation to Rule 1 2(2) of the CVR,2007 provides an illustrative list of reasons for which the proper officer could raise doubts on the truth or accuracy of the declared value the illustrative list includes; (a) Significantly higher values of identical/similar contemporaneous goods; (b) Abnormal discount/reduction from the competitive price; (c) Special discounts to exclusive agents; (d) Mis-declaration of the goods' description, quality, quantity, country of origin, year of manufacture or production; (e) Non-declaration of the goods' brand, grade, specifications relevant to the value thereof ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncorrect; He further submits that none of the conditions illustrated under Rule 12 exist in the instant case and therefore, the rejection was not proper and legal. We find that Learned Commissioner finds that the importer was accepting the loaded value of the consignments cleared earlier and for that reason the importer does not have any reason for not accepting the loading of the value in the instant case. 8. We find that except for the fact that the bill of lading is earlier to the date of invoice, Learned Commissioner has not shown any reason to reject the declared value. On going through the explanation given by the appellants for deviation from LME price, we find that the same are normal in the trade. We find that this explanation giv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
