Dry metric ton valuation governs iron ore export duty where the contract fixes price on dry weight terms.

Export duty and assessable value for iron ore fines were required to be determined on the contractual dry metric ton basis, because the agreed transaction value was expressed on dry weight terms. The Tribunal distinguished the cited Supreme Court ruling as one dealing with quantification where weight itself was the levy basis, and held that the wet weight method had no relevance here. The Revenue's challenge was rejected, and assessment on the dry metric ton basis was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether export duty and assessable value for iron ore fines exported under the contract were to be determined on wet metric ton basis or dry metric ton basis.

Analysis: The contract price was based on dry metric tons, and the earlier appellate finding that valuation had to follow the contractual dry metric ton basis was accepted. The Tribunal held that the cited Supreme Court decision concerned quantification of duty where weight itself was the basis of levy, whereas in the present matter the duty was to be computed on the transaction value agreed between the parties on dry weight terms. The wet weight method was therefore held irrelevant, and the Revenue's challenge was found to be without merit.

Conclusion: The assessment was correctly required to be made on dry metric ton basis, and the Revenue's appeal failed.

---