1983 (1) TMI 264 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Upholds Value Enhancement Decision Based on Advocate's Statement

KRISHNA & CO., NEW DELHI Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal challenging the Deputy Collector's decision to enhance the value of imported goods, affirming that the advocate's ... - Issues: Appeal against the order of the Appellate Collector of Customs Bombay regarding the valuation of imported goods and the benefit of importation under O.O.L.Analysis:1. The revision petition was transferred to the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT New Delhi by the Central Board of Excise & Customs and treated as an appeal under section 131-B of the Customs Act, 1962. The appeal challenged the order of the Appellate Collector of Customs Bombay dated 30th January, 1981, regarding the valuation of 65 pieces of cylinder heads imported from Czechoslovakia by the appellant Company.2. The Assistant Collector of Customs issued a show cause notice stating that the value of the consignment should be increased to Rs. 1,22,066 and questioned the benefit of importation under O.O.L. The Deputy Collector of Customs, Bombay, adjudicated the case and enhanced the value of the goods to Rs. 1,22,066 but allowed clearance under OGL.3. The appeal was made to the Appellate Collector of Customs challenging the Deputy Collector's order. The appellant's counsel tried to disown a statement made before the Deputy Collector regarding the nature and price of the goods. However, the Tribunal found the statement clear and unambiguous, noting that the appellant's attempt to reinterpret the statement was not convincing.4. The Tribunal emphasized that no affidavit was presented to challenge the statement made by the appellant's advocate before the Deputy Collector or the Appellate Collector. The Tribunal considered the statement of the advocate as crucial in determining the fair price of the imported goods, leading to the enhancement of the value by the Deputy Collector.5. The Tribunal rejected the appellant's argument that the statement was misinterpreted by the Deputy Collector, as no supporting affidavit was provided. The Tribunal upheld the Deputy Collector's decision to enhance the value based on the advocate's statement, as it was deemed conclusive and not open to alternative interpretations.6. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, stating that the advocate's statement had decisively settled the issue, rendering other grounds or arguments irrelevant. The Tribunal affirmed the Deputy Collector's order, as confirmed by the Collector in the first appeal, based on the advocate's clear and unambiguous statement regarding the fair price of the imported goods.7. The Tribunal concluded that the appeal lacked merit and was accordingly dismissed, highlighting the importance of the advocate's statement in determining the valuation of the imported goods and the applicability of the benefit of importation under O.O.L.