Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
<h1>Tribunal remands valuation of 25 Cellular Telephony System units for reassessment</h1> <h3>ACME TELECOM (P) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI</h3> ACME TELECOM (P) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI - 2002 (147) E.L.T. 319 (Tri. - Del.) Issues Involved:Valuation of 25 units of 'Cellular Telephony System'Analysis:The appellant, an importer, declared the valuation of 25 units of 'Cellular Telephony System' at 100 US Dollars per unit based on a proforma invoice. However, customs authorities loaded an additional 457.88 US Dollars per unit, valuing them at 557.88 US Dollars or Rs. 20,000/- per unit. The appellant contended that the imported goods were LICEA-II fixed cellular subscriber units, different from mobile cellular phones, as they stop functioning in motion. The appellant argued that the loading of 457.88 US Dollars per unit for customs duty assessment was incorrect based on technical data.The Departmental Representative (DR) argued that the imported system had sophisticated functions and was rightly assessed by the lower officer due to the lack of a commercial invoice. The DR stated that the proforma invoice submitted by the appellant had no commercial value and could not be used for duty assessment. The DR highlighted the rapid deployment and low operational costs of fixed cellular networks, justifying the higher valuation imposed.The Tribunal considered both arguments and found that the valuation was determined under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules due to the absence of similar past imports. However, the basis for valuing the units at Rs. 20,000/- per set was not adequately disclosed. The Tribunal emphasized the need for technical expert opinion on the nature of the imported goods and the valuation methodology. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the previous order and remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for reassessment based on disclosed valuation principles and expert opinion, allowing the appeal by way of remand.