TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (11) TMI 220
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s) US $ 829 PMT/CIF Rs. 3,47,00,944/- HDPE Film Grade (2000 Metric Tonnes) US $ 890 PMT/CIF Rs. 6,47,84,156/- HDPE blow moulding Grade (1250 Metric Tonnes) US $ 860 PMT/CIF Rs. 3,91,26,975/- PVC Resin Paste grade (1600 Metric Tonnes) US $ 930 PMT/CIF Rs. 5,41,54,499/- LLDPE Film grade (2000 Metric Tonnes) US $ 829 PMT/CIF Total Rs. 6,03,49,580/- Rs. 25,31,16,154/- 3. In view of the enhanced assessable value as mentioned above, the order confirms the duty demand of Rs. 3,13,79,647/- under Section 28 of Customs Act. Penalty of the same amount under Section 114A of the Customs Act has also been imposed on the appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce no fraud is alleged or involved. 7.  Ld. Advocate further submits that basis of this valuation is totally erroneous for the following reasons :- (i)  Rule 10A of the Valuation Rules ibid cannot be invoked as this was not in currency during the period of import which was May, 1997. The said rule was inserted vide Notification No. 10/98 (N.T.)-Cus., dated 19-2-1998 . As has been held in the case of Lakshmi Packaging as in 1998 (98) E.L.T. 91, even operation of Section 11AC cannot be with retrospective but only from the date it was introduced. The ratio of that decision applies in this case also and said rule cannot be invoked for a cause of action originating prior to 19-2-1998, which in this case is May, 1997. Therefore, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eported in 1987 (31) E.L.T. 551 (Tribunal), these price ranges cannot be accepted as the values to enhance the declared transaction values. (iii) He submits that the two letters exchanged between the local parties also are mere quotations and to that extent they do not represent contemporaneous imports . The law in this is very clear and he cites the decision of the Tribunal in C.C. v. Grover Overseas (P) Ltd. & Ors as reported in 1999 (84) ECR 184 (Tribunal). He also cites the case law as in C.C. v. Mehta Trading House P. Ltd. reported in 1999 (107) E.L.T. 603 (Tribunal) = l999 (33) RLT 557 (CEGAT) and Sippy Pramod Steel Alloys Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C. as in 1990 (45) E.L.T. 444 (Tribunal). (iv) There is no import trade violation and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this ground also, the invocation of Rule 10A is valid. He also submits that correspondences exchanged between M/s. Mitsubishi Corporation and M/s. LG Polymers India Pvt. Ltd., are reliable evidences as both the companies are reputed and reiterates department's submissions in the cross-objections as well as the order impugned on this issue. He therefore reiterates the order-in-original impugned and submits that there are no infirmities therein. 9.  We have carefully considered the rival submissions and case records. 10.  We find that Rule 10A of the Customs Valuation Rules cannot be applied to these imports of May, 1997 as it was inserted into effect vide Notification No. 10/98 (N.T.)-Cus., dated 19-2-1998. A new statute can....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... import of 16 MT thereof from same country of origin around 10-4-1997. The quantity imported in the present appeal is 1250 MT i.e., almost 9 times more. It is a well recognised principle of valuation under the Act that when prices of identical or comparable goods are to be relied upon, then the quantity discounts are also to be considered. Obviously, it would not be correct to apply the price at which 16 MT of the item is imported to import thereof of 1250 MTS. The order impugned raises the value by US $ 50/MT i.e., from declared US $ 860 to US $ 910 on this count. The differential value of US $ 50/MT is less than even 8%. We are of the considered view that most suppliers would give such or even more discounts for bulk supplies of 1250 MTs ....