TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether interest payable on deferred payment terms was to be added to the price of the imported goods for determining assessable value under the Customs Act; (ii) whether the reduction of redemption fine by the Tribunal was liable to be interfered with for want of adequate reasons.
Issue (i): Whether interest payable on deferred payment terms was to be added to the price of the imported goods for determining assessable value under the Customs Act.
Analysis: Under Section 14 of the Customs Act, assessable value turns on the price of the goods. The interest in question did not go to the seller but to the banker and was attributable to the 120 days allowed to the assessee for payment. On that reasoning, the interest did not form part of or swell the price of the goods.
Conclusion: The interest was not includible in the assessable value, and this contention was rejected.
Issue (ii): Whether the reduction of redemption fine by the Tribunal was liable to be interfered with for want of adequate reasons.
Analysis: The Tribunal had estimated the redemption fine after noticing that the Collector's notes could not be treated as evidence and after adopting a workable estimate of the margin of profit at the relevant time. The estimate was supported by the material considered by the Tribunal and did not call for appellate interference.
Conclusion: No interference was warranted with the Tribunal's estimation of redemption fine.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on both issues and was dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi: Interest paid to a banker for deferred payment does not form part of the assessable value unless it augments the seller's price, and a Tribunal's reasoned estimation of redemption fine based on relevant material will not be disturbed absent legal error.
TaxTMI 
