https://www.taxtmi.com/css/info/rss_sitemap/rss_feed.css?v=1746094055 https://www.taxtmi.com Business/Tax/Law/GST/India/Taxation/Policies/Legal/Corporate Tax/Personal Tax/Vat Law/Legal Information/Tax Information/Legal Services/Tax Services Tax Management India. Com / MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved. One stop solution for Direct Taxes and Indirect Taxes https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119044 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119044 Valuation of crude petroleum - demand - Bill of Lading quantity - Whether the actual freight paid to the shipping company or the freight in respect of the quantity received in the shore tank is to be taken for assessment purposes - HELD THAT:- In the present case, the price actually paid or payable is on the basis of the Bill of Lading quantity. On account of the losses, the appellant is not entitled for any reduction in price. In that case, the amount paid or payable on the Bill of Lading quantity is the transaction value for the purposes of Customs duty irrespective of the fact that the quantity received in the shore tank is different from the Bill of Lading quantity. In a product like petroleum crude, due to various causes, losses occur. This is considered natural. That is the reason for not giving any reduction in the price payable. In these circumstances, there is absolutely no provision to reduce the value to that attributable to the quantity received in the shore tank. It was contended by the learned Advocate for the appellants that in certain cases, the quantity received is more and they are paying more duty. We feel that even in those cases where the quantity received is more, it is enough if the appellants discharge duty liability on the actual amount paid on the basis of the Bill of Lading quantity. There is no legal sanction for collecting more duty when the levy is ad valorem. The learned Advocate further contended that if the stand of the Revenue is accepted, Sections 13 23 of the Customs Act would be rendered redundant. We do not agree. Section 13 of the Customs Act makes a provision for waiver of duty on goods pilferaged after their unloading and before the proper officer has made an order for clearance for home consumption or deposit in a warehouse. But if the goods are restored to the importer after pilferage he has to discharge the duty liability. In order to emphasis the point that no duty need be paid on goods not received, the learned Advocate has referred to Section 13 Section 23. We want to make it clear that it is not the question of demanding duty on goods not received. But it is the demand of duty on the transaction value. In spite of the ocean loss, the appellant has to make payment on the basis of the Bill of Lading quantity. Therefore this is the case where the transaction value arrived at based on the Bill of Lading quantity is payable as price for the quantity received in shore tank. The learned Advocate for the appellants and the learned Consultant for the Revenue both pleaded that if their contentions are not accepted, the issue may be referred to a Larger Bench. We hold that this Bench in the appellant s own case [ 2002 (1) TMI 114 - CEGAT, BANGALORE] in the Final Order, has decided the issue only in the context of specific rate of duty. In other words, the said decision did not decide the question of transaction value on the basis of levy on ad-valorem basis. We hold the view that so long as the appellants make payment on the basis of Bill of Lading quantity, there is no case for determining the value for assessment purpose on the basis of quantity received in shore tanks. This is in consonance with the decision in the case of Exim India Oil Co. Ltd. [ 2000 (12) TMI 169 - CEGAT, KOLKATA] . In no way, this decision is contradictory to the decision of the Final Order for the simple reason that the earlier order is applicable only when the duty at specific rate. Therefore, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal of M/s. MRPL. However, the learned Advocate pointed out that lot of mistakes crept in the calculation of duty liability. Therefore while upholding the decision of the adjudicating authority, we remand the matter only for proper computation of duty liability on the basis of the payment made by the appellants to M/s. IOC based on Bill of Lading quantity. We dispose of the appeal in the above terms. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 06 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530