TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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 Rules on Customs Valuation & Freight Charges, Upholds Collector's Decision</h1> The Tribunal upheld the Collector's decision on the assessment of the value of the imported car for customs purposes, rejecting the contention to add ... Appeal - Condonation of delay Issues:1. Assessment of value of imported car for customs purposes.2. Computation of freight charges for imported car.3. Condonation of delay in filing Cross Objection.4. Determination of C.I.F. value of imported car.5. Consideration of rate of exchange for imported car valuation.Assessment of value of imported car for customs purposes:The respondent imported a car and the value was assessed at Rs. 2,58,816 with a depreciation allowance and added freight charges. The appeal was filed challenging the computation of freight charges. The Collector (Appeals) partially allowed the appeal, directing to add 20% of the FOB value of the car as freight charges. The Tribunal rejected the contention that freight should be added based on the depreciated value and held that ascertained freight from the country of origin should be considered. The respondent's claim that the price quoted by the manufacturer is the C.I.F. price was unsubstantiated, leading to the Collector's decision being upheld.Computation of freight charges for imported car:The Collector (Appeals) directed to add 20% of the FOB value as freight charges, which was contested by the Department. The Department argued that actual freight from Japan to India should be added, not a percentage of the value. Precedent decisions by the Tribunal supported this stance. The Tribunal agreed with the Department, emphasizing that freight charges should be based on the actual freight from the country of origin. The respondent's argument regarding the freight charges was not substantiated, leading to the Collector's decision being overturned.Condonation of delay in filing Cross Objection:The respondent filed a Cross Objection with a condonation application due to hospitalization, supported by a Medical Certificate. The delay was deemed non-deliberate and was condoned by the Tribunal. The Department opposed the condonation, but the Tribunal allowed it based on medical grounds. Certain new points raised in the Cross Objection were considered, including the rate of exchange, which was not raised before the lower authorities.Determination of C.I.F. value of imported car:The respondent argued that the Department should have considered the price quoted by the manufacturer as the C.I.F. value of the imported car, which was not done. However, this claim was unsubstantiated, and the Tribunal upheld the Collector's decision in this regard. The respondent's contentions regarding additional fittings and deductions from the assessable value were also found to be unsupported by evidence.Consideration of rate of exchange for imported car valuation:The respondent raised a new point before the Tribunal regarding the rate of exchange for determining the value of the imported car. They argued that the Department should have used the exchange rate from 1988, not 1993. However, this argument conflicted with the Customs Act's provision that the price should be calculated based on the exchange rate at the time of presenting the Bill of Entry. Therefore, the Department's appeal was allowed, and the Cross Objection was dismissed by the Tribunal.---
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
