TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (8) TMI 260
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he appellants should be taken as US $ 780 per Metric Tonne for purposes of assessment of Customs duty as against the value of US $ 680 per Metric Tonne declared in the relevant invoices covering the consignment. While ordering so, the Collector had, however, held that the local indents and Sales Confirmation covering the imports were genuine. The charge of misdeclaration of value as well as the proposal for confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty contained in the show cause notice were dropped by him. Aggrieved with the order fixing the assessable value as above rejecting the invoice value, the appellants have filed these appeals. 2. Shri B.N. Rangwani, learned Consultant appeared for the appellants M/s. Supreme Plastics. He....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubmitted that such a finding does not account for the fact that no other import had taken place against the said contract. There was also no evidence that there was a subsequent contract in June, 1987 against which the goods in question had been imported. It was hence contended by the learned Counsel that the imports were in fact against the April, 1987 contract only and the contracted price was genuine. The contract in question itself provided for a delivery time of about three [months] and the shipment was to be in July, 1987. The actual date of shipment was 15th August, 1987. On the score it is not justified to come to a conclusion that the import was not against that contract and that there must have been different contract entered into....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....entative also stated that the manufacturer's invoices were not produces by the appellants as stated in Page 2 of the Collector's order. Shri Ali submitted that the Collector has granted a big concession to the appellants by fixing the assessable value at US $ 680 per Metric Tonne. The proposal in the show cause notice was to take the assessable value as $ 900 Metric Tonne which was the price noticed for contemporaneous import. He relied upon the Tribunal decision in Poonam Plastic Industries v. Collector of Customs reported in 1989 (39) E.L.T. 634. 5. Shri Sridharan, learned Counsel gave a brief rejoinder to the submissions made by the learned DR. He said that the statement referred to by him regarding the indent had been retracted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eriod of question from the date of entering into a contract to the date of its execution in the form of shipment as experienced in the study of various orders. The supplier's prices do not reflect the ruling prices prevailing at the time of despatch. (6) No evidence is found to doubt the bona fide nature of the supplier's invoices. (7) The allegation of misdeclaration and under invoicing has not been established. From the Collector's findings, summarised above, it is seen that all the relevant documents, namely, the local indent the confirmation by the supplier and the supplier's invoices have been held to be genuine. All the allegations regarding their non-bona fide nature have been dropped. The finding, however, is that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s seen to be $ 680 per Metric Tonne which was the price quoted in the order of confirmation. The genuineness of that document has not been denied by the Collector in his order. This document itself refers to the delivery period as July, 1987. Simply because the shipments took place in August, 1987, it cannot be held that such shipments did not relate to the April contract and a subsequent contract must have been entered into against which only the actual shipment took place. The charge of manipulation of documents has been dropped by the Collector. There is no appeal by the department to challenge that findings. If the April confirmation/contract was genuine as accepted by the Collector the question will be what happened to the same. It is ....