9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1359X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Department is to set aside the Order-in-Appeal of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) and remand the case back to the Lower Adjudicating Authority for examining the issue of valuation of related imports afresh. 2.1 Briefly stated the facts are that the Respondent M/s. Hydragrene Hydraulics (India) Pvt. Ltd., Chennai whose name has got changed to M/s. Hydraspecma India Private Limited is engaged in the manufacturing of hydraulic components and providing hydraulic system solutions and know-how primarily for wind turbine manufacturers. The Respondent is a subsidiary of the foreign company and are related in terms of Rule 2(2) of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007. It appears that the manufactured ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f an independent buyer (M/s. Vestas) imported from the same supplier. These details were provided by the Appellant himself to the Lower Adjudicating Authority who has decided the percentage of variation on the basis of mean average of these items. The following details which were submitted by the appellant before the Appellate Authority are to be noted : - (a) Impugned order merely considers two invoices relating to supplies to Vestas. Impugned order refers to 22 items whereas there are over 100 items imported. (b) Components to Vestas are not the only imports. There are other customers who buy various components from appellants. The products vary from user to user and are not one and the same. (c) In the case of Commissioner of Custo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o arrive at a decision regarding the acceptance of the declared value. (vi) Accordingly, the subject Order-in-Appeal may be set aside and the matter may be remanded to the LAA for examining the issue afresh. " 3. Ms. O.M. Reena, Additional Commissioner, the Ld. Authorised Representative for the Department, reiterated the grounds of appeal and submitted that the impugned order of the lower authority suffered from legal infirmities as it failed to examine the values of all the items imported by the Respondent-importer with comparable values of imports by other independent buyers to determine the appropriate value by applying relevant rules under CVR. It was pointed out that the impugned order ignored the fact that the values declared by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered the submissions and evidences on record. 6. On perusal of the Order-in-Original dated 14.05.2013 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs (SVB), Chennai, it is revealed that he sought to enhance the values of the imported products taking into consideration, the values of the imported products supplied to Vestas RRB, Chennai as given in the table (partly) annexed below: - Article No Value for Hydragrene (euro) Value of Vestas (Euro) Difference in price % of variation RL4228DKOX 620 7.64 1.44 23.2 M-06-10 1.05 1.39 0.34 32.4 VW-763115 1330.85 1692.50 361.65 27.2 VW-764768 303.44 383.22 79.78 26.3 V764060-R01 219.19 273.75 54.56 24.9 CE42RL/OAX 20.73 25.64 4.91 23.7 VW-250478 1.88 2.32 0.44 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence the price. (b) In a sale between related persons, the transaction value shall be accepted, whenever the importer demonstrates that the declared value of the goods being valued, closely approximates to one of the following values ascertained at or about the same time. (i) the transaction value of identical goods, or of similar goods, in sales to unrelated buyers in India; (ii) the deductive value for identical goods or similar goods; (iii) the computed value for identical goods or similar goods: Provided that in applying the values used for comparison, due account shall be taken of demonstrated difference in commercial levels, quantity levels, adjustments in accordance with the provisions of rule 10 and cost incurred by the se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iginal Authority should have examined the values of all the items under import with those values of identical or similar items imported by the independent buyers from the same supplier or other identical or similar contemporaneous imports. The Lower Appellate Authority has also without examining the issue in detail has simply ordered to set aside the order of the Original Authority leaving a vacuum as to the values to be adopted for the imported goods by the related importer-respondent. In case of any related imports as the issue of valuation is involved in continuing transactions, we are of the considered opinion that the case is to be remanded to the Lower Original Authority for considering the issue afresh in strict observance of the pri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
