1987 (5) TMI 222 - AT - Customs

Tribunal upholds addition of landing charges to customs value

The Tribunal dismissed the 76 appeals challenging the addition of landing charges to the value of imported goods at Bombay Customs. The appellants' ... Valuation Issues:Dispute over addition of landing charges to imported goods' value at Bombay Customs.Detailed Analysis:1. Background of the Dispute: The dispute in the 76 appeals before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi revolves around the addition of landing charges to the value of goods imported at Bombay Customs. The Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay had passed an order disposing of 91 appeals, leading to the current 76 appeals.2. Contentions of the Appellants: The appellants, represented by Mr. Ganesh, argued that landing charges should be added at the actual charges by the Port Trust, not the notional 0.75% imposed by the Customs House. They contended that landing charges should not be part of the assessable value and urged for consideration of only actual charges.3. Department's Position: The department's counsel, Mr. Doiphode, questioned the belated plea to change the long-standing practice of adding landing charges. He argued that non-addition of landing charges would lead to incorrect assessment as these charges are a significant component of the goods' value in the Indian market.4. Judicial Precedents: Two judgments were cited, including the Gujarat High Court judgment, which supported the inclusion of landing charges in the assessable value for customs duty computation. However, the appellants sought inclusion of only actual charges, not exclusion of landing charges altogether.5. Clarification on Charges: The appellants clarified that the charges paid to the Bombay Port Trust were for wharfage and demurrage, distinct from landing charges. They emphasized that the Customs Authorities erred in treating these charges as landing charges, highlighting the difference between various types of charges incurred.6. Decision of the Tribunal: The Tribunal rejected the appellants' plea for inclusion of actual charges instead of the notional 0.75% landing charges. It was noted that the appellants failed to demonstrate the existence of actual charges different from the standard rate. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed, and the principle in favor of actual charges was not declared due to the absence of sufficient grounds.This detailed analysis outlines the key arguments, judicial precedents, and the Tribunal's decision regarding the dispute over the addition of landing charges to the value of imported goods at Bombay Customs.