TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (4) TMI 576
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - The respondent to this appeal is absent and unrepresented. By letter dated 3-2-1999 adjournment is sought on the ground that the respondent's Advocate Shri V. Lakshmi Kumaran is busy in some other hearing. An adjournment of the hearing fixed for 13-1-1999 was granted on the same ground. In view of the fact that there is no request fr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment Mukesh Sharma said the goods were initially to be transported by country craft in bulk packing but they were actually transported in containers on a steamer. The contract was not amended to incorporate this fact, and continued to show the original price which was US $ 110 PMT CIF Bombay. He said the freight actually charged was US $ 500 per container totaling US $ 5,000 instead of constitutin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a commentary on the GATT Valuation Code to say that if by error the goods contracted to be shipped by sea were shipped by air only the actual cost to the buyer has to be added to the price. He therefore held that only US $ 1173 was to be taken as freight. Hence this appeal by the department. 5. It is not in dispute that the actual cost incurred for transportation is US $ 5,000. This is th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n on the commentary relied upon by the Commissioner. On the facts before us, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that the increased freight was arrived at mutually between seller and buyer and it has not been in any case claimed or shown due to mistake of shipment by supplier. Therefore the freight actually incurred should rightly form part of the assessable value. Since the part of the freig....