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, Emphasizes Legal Nexus for Value Determination</h1> <h3>COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE, CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS Versus HIND AFGHAN CO., DELHI AND OTHERS</h3> COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE, CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS Versus HIND AFGHAN CO., DELHI AND OTHERS - 1986 (23) E.L.T. 270 (Tribunal) Issues:1. Valuation of imported goods based on newspaper rates and deduced landed cost.2. Applicability of Section 14(a) and 14(b) of the Customs Act, 1962.3. Timeliness and verification of appeals filed.4. Burden of proof regarding valuation and assessable value determination.5. Legal nexus for determining value with reference to international trade.Analysis:Issue 1: Valuation of imported goods based on newspaper rates and deduced landed costThe case involved importers of Apricot Dry/Pista Kernel/Figs Dry challenging the valuation of goods by the Assistant Collector based on wholesale market rates from newspapers. The Assistant Collector calculated deduced landed cost, leading to a significant difference between the assessed value and actual value paid by the importers. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) found no proof of manipulation in the invoices and questioned the comparability of goods priced in newspapers to those under assessment.Issue 2: Applicability of Section 14(a) and 14(b) of the Customs Act, 1962The appellant argued that if Section 14(a) was not applicable, Section 14(b) could be invoked, citing precedents where Custom House authorities used best judgment to fix values. The burden of proof and shifting onus in valuation disputes were discussed, emphasizing the need for specific findings before resorting to Section 14(b) for valuation.Issue 3: Timeliness and verification of appeals filedThe respondents raised objections regarding the timeliness and verification of appeals, citing legal precedents. The Tribunal examined the verification process and relevant rules, ultimately ruling that the appeals were not liable to be rejected based on verification irregularities.Issue 4: Burden of proof regarding valuation and assessable value determinationThe main question revolved around the valuation of goods for customs duty purposes. The Tribunal emphasized the requirement for the sale to be in the course of international trade under Section 14(a) of the Customs Act. The concept of deduced landed cost was deemed irrelevant post-introduction of Section 14, with a focus on establishing the real value of imported goods through proper channels.Issue 5: Legal nexus for determining value with reference to international tradeThe Tribunal highlighted the necessity of proving the legal nexus for determining the value of imported goods with reference to international trade. It was noted that reliance solely on prices from financial journals without establishing comparability to international trade prices was insufficient. The Tribunal upheld the findings of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) regarding the valuation of goods and dismissed all appeals and cross-objections.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals based on the valuation issues and legal considerations surrounding the determination of assessable value for imported goods, emphasizing the need for proper evidence and adherence to statutory provisions in customs valuation disputes.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
