Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the disallowance of 25% discount claimed by the importer in the assessable value of imported goods was legal and proper.
Analysis: The agreement initially mentioned a 17% discount, but the record also contained prior fax communication and later e-mail correspondence indicating that 25% discount was intended. The invoices reflected 25% discount, the remittances matched the invoice value, and the department did not produce evidence to show that the remittances exceeded the invoice price. The earlier remand had specifically directed consideration of the e-mail communication, and the later amended agreement supported the claim that 25% discount was applicable retrospectively from 2001. On this material, the importer established that the higher discount was actually allowed by the foreign supplier.
Conclusion: The disallowance of 25% discount was unsustainable and the assessee was entitled to adoption of the 25% discount for valuation.
Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the assessee succeeded in the appeal with consequential relief.
Ratio Decidendi: Where contemporaneous communications, invoices, and payment records establish that the contractual discount actually granted was higher than the figure mistakenly recorded in the agreement, and the department fails to rebut the same, the declared discount must be accepted for valuation purposes.