1997 (4) TMI 320

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in January, 1991. The appellants herein also produced during the course of adjudication proceedings in reply to show cause notice manufacturer's invoice which shows the price of the said goods at US $ 950, per M.T. c & f Calcutta. On the other hand, the Assistant Collector, in pursuance of High Court's direction gave certain documents relied upon by the Revenue on the date of hearing i.e. 23-5-1991. No evidence was given beforehand. The appellants were asked to comment on the said documents by evening of 23-5-1991. The appellants did comment on the same. Later on, on 29-5-1991, they were given two more documents which are fax messages available at pages 56 and 57 of the paper-book. The document at page 56 shows a fax message from Hyundai C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ds the fax messages available at pages 56 and 57 of the paperbook and referred to above, learned Consultant has submitted that these are not authentic pieces of documents because the name of the addressee of the fax message is not available. In one case, the fax message is unsigned. He also points out that these two fax messages also relate to tape grade HDPE and not to wide specification HDPE Elaborating his arguments on wide specification learned Consultant submits that "wide specification" is used for off-grade specification, as already held by the Tribunal in the case of Varsha Polyproducts Pvt. Ltd., Bombay & Ors. v. Collector of Customs, Kandla reported in 1994 (74) E.L.T. 151 (Tribunal) = 1994 (4) RLT 673 (CEGAT-A) . In view of the f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e manufacturer's price. There is no reason, therefore, to discard the declared price. For this purpose, he relies on Tribunal's judgment in the case of Sai Impex v. Collector of Customs reported in 1992 (62) E.L.T. 616 (Tribunal) (Paras 8 and 11). In short, the plea of the learned Counsel is that the declared price should be accepted and the appeal be allowed. 3.1 Opposing the contention, learned SDR Shri T. Premkumar of the Revenue urges that the lower authorities had relied on the computer print out and the two fax messsages mentioned above. Computer print out clearly indicates the prices of contemporaneous imports at a higher level than one has been declared. On a query from the Bench, he, however, clearly concedes that the print....