TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e were supplies at higher prices of the same product. The value was raised to Rs. 19 lakhs based on the said contemporaneous import. The present appeal challenges that enhancement. 3. The contention of the appellant is that the consignment was brought as stock lot and that accounted for the lower price. It is being pointed out that the invoice describes the goods as "quality commercial/stock lot". Learned Counsel also took us to the examination report of the consignment. He has also relied on the letter dated 19-7-2002 of the supplier certifying that consignment was "commercial/stock lot/stock clearance sale which was taken place during the month of February 2002 on the eve of Chinese New Year". Learned Counsel has submitted that it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated to clearance sale on the eve of Chinese New Year. These circumstances show that the discount is not abnormal. It is a discount given in clearance sale. That such a clearance sale price is acceptable for valuation remains settled by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Mirah Exports Ltd. v. C.C. (supra). We read para 13 of that judgment : 13. In the present case the only evidence that was adduced by Revenue in support of the charge of under valuation is the price list No. 8102, dated February 15th, 1981 which was found during the course of search in the premises of Skefko, etc. that was conducted by the officers of Enforcement Directorate on or about June 22, 1983. The price list does not even mention about the discount of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rah Exports and that discount from 50% to 70%, on the list prices was the normal invoice price for a number of unconnected importers during the period. The Collector of Customs, while passing the orders dated December 5, 1986 and March 20, 1987 and the Tribunal in the impugned judgment have not taken note of the said documents and the fact that the importers had been given 50% to 70% discount on the prices indicated in the list price. The present case is covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 6. In view of what is stated above, we are of the opinion that the enhancement of value was not justified in the present case. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief to the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
