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 rules in favor of appellant on valuation of imported parts</h1> <h3>M/s. C & S Electric Ltd. Versus C.C., New Delhi</h3> M/s. C & S Electric Ltd. Versus C.C., New Delhi - TMI Issues:Import of parts of switches from a related person, valuation of imports under Customs Valuation Rules, remand by Commissioner (Appeals) for consideration of Rule 3 (3) (a) and (b) of the Valuation Rules.Analysis:The appeal was against an order by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) regarding the valuation of imported parts of switches from a related person. The appellant imported parts from a related person, and the case was referred to the Special Valuation Branch (SVB) for valuation. The Dy. Commissioner of Customs, SVB accepted the invoice value as transaction value under Rule 3 (3) (a) of the Customs Valuation Rules, stating that the relationship did not influence the price. The Revenue appealed the decision, leading to a remand by the Commissioner (Appeals) for consideration of Rule 3 (3) (a) and (b) of the Valuation Rules.The appellant argued that the Dy. Commissioner's conclusion was in line with Rule 3 (3) (a) as the foreign supplier did not supply the same goods to any other buyer and included profit in the goods supplied. The Revenue supported the findings in the impugned order and the remand for satisfying the requirements of Rule 3 (3) (b). Upon hearing both sides, the Tribunal noted the Dy. Commissioner's findings that the relationship did not influence the price, as evidenced by various submissions and declarations from the foreign supplier.The Tribunal found that the Dy. Commissioner's order was in conformity with the Customs Valuation Rules, as the relationship did not influence the price, and contemporaneous import data was not available. Therefore, there was no need to remand the matter for reevaluation under Rule 3 (3) (b) of the Valuation Rules. Consequently, the Tribunal did not find merit in the impugned order and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant.In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the valuation of the imported goods was in compliance with the Customs Valuation Rules, and there was no need for further consideration under Rule 3 (3) (b) of the Valuation Rules.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
