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: Whether the customs duty demand could be sustained by adopting the quantity shown in the provisional invoice while ignoring the final invoice and the contractual method of determining weight and price, and whether the departmental circular on valuation was applicable.
Analysis: The imports were made under a contract providing that the final quantity would be determined at the place of import and the final price would be based on the London Metal Exchange rate prevailing at the relevant time. The final invoice reflected that agreed basis. The difference between the provisional and final quantity was negligible and could arise from normal measuring variation. The circular dated 27.08.2008 stated that the final invoice price, arrived at under the contract, should be accepted as the transaction value unless there were substantive reasons to reject it, and that a notional value could not be adopted in the absence of such rejection on cogent grounds.
Conclusion: The circular applied to the case and the demand based on the provisional invoice was unsustainable.
Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the valuation was required to be accepted on the basis of the final contractual invoice.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the final invoice reflects the contractual method of determining quantity and price, and there are no substantive grounds to reject transaction value, customs valuation cannot be fixed on a notional basis by relying only on the provisional invoice.
TaxTMI 
