TaxTMI Login
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
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Upholds Customs Valuation Decision on Palladium Catalyst, Rejects Appeal</h1> <h3>M/s. MCCPTA India Corporation (P) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata</h3> M/s. MCCPTA India Corporation (P) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata - 2016 (331) E.L.T. 97 (Tri. - Kolkata) Issues:1. Valuation of imported Palladium Catalyst under Customs Valuation Rules-1988.2. Applicability of Notification No.21/2002-CUS dated 01.03.2002 for valuation.Analysis:1. The appeal was filed against an order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs(Appeals), Kolkata, regarding the valuation of Palladium Catalyst imported by the appellant. The appellant filed a bill of entry for clearance of the item, which was provisionally assessed and later finally assessed based on a test report confirming the item as Palladium Catalyst. The value was re-determined under Customs Valuation Rules-1988, leading to an appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals) and subsequently to the forum. The appellant argued for valuation based on a specific notification, while the Revenue disagreed, citing the Apex Court's judgment in Mohan Diaries case (2004(266)ELT 23(SC).2. The Notification No.21/2002-CUS dated 01.03.2002, as amended, was examined for its applicability to the imported Palladium Catalyst valuation. The notification provided exemptions for specified goods, subject to certain conditions. The appellant contended that the methodology for valuation under the notification should apply due to a similar position, even though the notification explicitly related to zinc metal. However, the Revenue argued that the benefit of the notification could not extend to Palladium as it was not covered under the notification. The Tribunal analyzed the notification's language and concluded that the benefit did not apply to Palladium, upholding the decision of the Commissioner(Appeals) to determine the value based on contemporary import under Customs Valuation Rules-1988.In the final judgment, the Tribunal found no merit in the appeal based on the facts and circumstances presented. The appeal was rejected, affirming the decision of the Commissioner(Appeals) regarding the valuation of the imported Palladium Catalyst.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 