Assessable value and pattern tooling cost: duty demand was premature absent any supply of castings during the period.

Duty could not be demanded on the apportioned cost of pattern tooling for the relevant period because no castings had actually been supplied or cleared to the buyer during that time. Although the revenue sought to treat the tooling cost as part of assessable value once regular supplies commenced, the record did not establish any supply during the period in question. In the absence of actual clearance, liability could not be fastened on the appellant at that stage, and the demand was therefore premature and unsustainable for that period.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand of duty on the cost of pattern tooling was sustainable when no supply of castings had been made during the relevant period.

Analysis: The duty demand was sought to be sustained on the footing that the apportioned cost of pattern tooling would form part of the assessable value once regular supplies commenced. The record, however, did not show that any castings had been supplied to the buyer during the relevant period. In the absence of actual supply or clearance during that period, the liability could not be fastened on the appellant at that stage.

Conclusion: The demand was premature and unsustainable for the relevant period.

---