TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (7) TMI 486
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f communication of this order. The bank guarantee furnished by the appellant shall be kept alive and the amount deposited shall also continue to remain in deposit till the date of decision by the Tribunal whereafter the bank guarantee and the deposit shall be dealt with consistently with the order of the Tribunal. 20. Though we have set aside the order of the Tribunal and made a remand we would like to clarify a few points. Apart from the appellant, two officers of the company namely Dr. J.J. Irani and Shri S.L. Shrivastava and an engineering consultant of the appellant, namely M/s. M.M. Dastur & Co. were also proceeded against and penalties were imposed on them. They were exonerated by the Triounal. The Revenue has not come up in appeal against the order of the Tribunal exonerating the above said three. This order of remand would not reopen the proceedings against those three. Similarly, the Tribunal has held that the duty liability of the appellant in spite of a finding of under-valuation could not be re-determined by pegging the value of the equipment at an amount over and above 21.2747826086 million DM as this was the figure found by the adjudicating officer and not cha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....imported, by transferring a part of the value of equipments to value of technical documents and drawings imported under contract MD 301, "consistently with the observations made and findings recorded" in its judgment by the Supreme Court (para 19). 3. In the said order, impugned herein, the Commissioner has, besides quoting with approval the findings contained in the earlier order dated 3rd April, 1996 on the issue, has given his further reasonings, in support of the purported conclusion arrived at, in paragraphs 21 to 23 (at pages 71-72) of the order. 4. Elaborating further of the aforesaid findings of the Commissioner, it has been contended on behalf of the respondent before this Hon'ble Tribunal that the transfer of part of the equipment cost to the technical documents cost has taken place in the instant case because of non-inclusion of the price of the following in the price of the equipments imported under MD 302 :- (i) Price of drawings and technical documents for site erection work to be done in India. (ii) Price of drawings and technical docume....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be observed from the said list that in case of blast furnace it includes specifically the drawings and technical documents for "site and erection engineering". This is further split up into four categories namely "(i) site lay-out and basic information for amenities, (ii) technical specifications and general drawings for erection tests and start up, (iii) manpower estimation and (iv) means for erection definition". Similarly, in respect of technical documents for T.L.C's (in section II of Annex. I), there are different "drawings for manufacture" and instructions for assembly and "instructions for commissioning as already extracted above. If one takes a look at page 788 of the paper book (Vol.-V), it will be observed that 3 Nos. "Torpedo Ladle Cars" having weight of 540 tons in S.N. Project is being supplied under the contract and no part thereof is to be manufactured or purchased in India, yet detailed drawings as indicated by use of symbol "D" in the table at page 788 (supra) and listed in Section II to the broad categories of drawings at page 747 (Vol. V-paper book) have been supplied. This belies the statement of the appellants that drawings for manufacture of only those parts ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....overed by a separate contract, i.e. contract MD 301. They could not have been included in the value of imported goods merely because the value of documents referable to imported equipments and materials was mixed up with the value of those documents which were referable to equipment which was yet to be procured or imported or manufactured by the appellant, the value of the latter category of documents also being neither dutiable nor clubbable with the value of imported goods......". 10. It is submitted that, in view of the aforesaid finding of the Supreme Court, none of the above two items mentioned in paragraph 4 hereinabove, can be included in the price of the equipments imported under MD 302, and consequently in determining assessable value thereof for the purpose of levy of customs duty. Therefore, on this ground it cannot be contended or held that there has been under-valuation of the equipment price by the appellant by transferring a part of the price thereof to the price of technical documents imported under MD 301. 11. In this respect it is also relevant to refer to the Annexure-I of MD 302 (Equipment Contract), which contains, inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....graphs 21 to 23 of the said order are erroneous and devoid of any merit. 18. With regard to the purported findings contained in paragraphs 16 to 19 of the said order, wherein the Commissioner has quoted with approval the purported findings contained in the earlier order dated 3rd April, 1996, it is submitted as hereunder. 19. It is submitted that the said order has been passed by the Commissioner without taking into consideration not only the findings of this Hon'ble Tribunal as contained in the order dated 20th February, 2001 but also the detailed submissions made by the appellant (in short 'TISCO') contained in inter alia the Written Notes of Argument filed before the Commissioner (at pages 1A to 20 of the Appellant's Paper Book-Volume I). This by itself has rendered the said order untenable and unsustainable. In this respect reliance is placed upon, inter alia the following decisions :- (i) Jai Bhawani Steel Enterprises Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, 2003 (157) E.L.T. 427 (T). (ii) Youngman Hosiery Factory v. Commissioner of Central Excise, 1999 (112) E.L.T. 114 (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issioner conveniently ignored/overlooked the fact, in spite of his attention being specifically drawn thereto that the ratios/per-centages disclosed in the said telex related to cost break-down figures received from SN based on "their contract values" with their suppliers i.e. ITP and others and that this percentage break-up would have no application whatsoever to the instant case. 23. The Commissioner failed to appreciate that this was not a back to back contract and all the materials which were received or receivable by SN in terms of contract it had entered into with its suppliers were not supplied under the subject contract with TISCO. This was ex facie apparent from the contract itself. For example, under item Nos. 2.3.12.1 and 2.4.10.4 of the contract (at pages 55 and 61 of Appellant's Paper Book-Volume I), it would be seen that approximately 2000 Metric Tonnes of refractories which SN had received from its suppliers under the contracts it had entered into with them would be kept by SN and was not supplied to TISCO. Similarly, it would be seen from the initial offer letter dated 4th April, 1986 of EH that under its respective contracts SN had not received....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CO to the Government of India, which vas enclosed as Annexure '3' to the reply to show cause notice (pages 251 to 267 of Appellant's Paper Book-Volume I, at p 254), would also show that as against the total equipment under the SN project of 23676 tonnes, items which were for sale by SN to TISCO was 14045 tonnes of equipments and materials, a shortfall of about 9600 Metric Tonnes approximately (at p. 254 of Paper Book). However, conveniently this has been ignored by the Commissioner in the said order on some patently absurd reasoning. 27. In this connection reference may also be made to the answer given by Shri N.R. Sudheer of EHI (whose statements had been relied upon in the said order by Commissioner) in response to the summons under Section 108 of the said Act. Question Nos. 21 and 22 of his statement dated 13-10-1991 (Pages 222 to 244 of Appellant's Paper Book-Volume I, at p227) and answer thereto are as follows :- "Q. No. 21 : Specifically talking about the B.F. and 3 TLC which details did you carry with you to TISCO? A The details carried by us to TISCO with offer was as follows:- (a) the brief technical description of the B.F. a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....SN under the subject contract was not the same quantities of equipments and materials which SN had received or were to receive under its contracts with suppliers. This material evidence was also ignored by the Commissioner, although his attention was drawn thereto. 29. The Commissioner has relied upon his predecessor's findings allegedly based upon the statement of Shri Parthasarathi, Technical Director of M/s. M.N. Dastur & Company Limited, to allege and hold that blast furnace equipments were "substantially complete". The answers given by Shri Parthasarathi as recorded in his statement dated 12th October, 1991 (Annexure 5 of SCN at pp. 174-195 of Appellant's Paper Book-Volume I), under Section 108 of the said Act, would ex facie demonstrate the incorrectness of this allegation/finding. They are as follows (emphasis added) :- Q.No. 8: What was the business there? Ans. I went there for seeing equipment as well as for discussion with SN Portugal Engineer to make assessment of balance equipment that would be required to be procured in India. I also wanted to collect some basic drawings with which we can start primary work for setting up the plant at J....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted with absolutely new equipment and price thereof could not be the same. There had to be a reduction of the price on this account. This also the Commissioner failed to appreciate and/or take into account. 31. The Commissioner failed to appreciate that there was or could be no substantial deterioration thereof. Moreover, as would appear from the aforequoted Answer to Question No. 22 by Shri N.R. Sudheer of EHI relied upon by the Commissioner, the engineerings and drawings were "for the whole plant" that is "over and above the equipment which was in possession with SN to enable any buyer to complete the plant by processing the rest of the items" than those sold under the subject contract by SN to the appellant. The contrary contention of the Commissioner, as contained in the said order, is erroneous. There is no support in the documents on record or even in the said order of the erroneous contention that the technical documents and the equipments, shorn of each other had no practical utility. The answers to Questions 39, 40 and 41 of Shri Parthasarathi as contained in his statement dated 12th October, 1992, (Annexure 5 of SCN at page 182 of Appellant's Paper Bo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....5 MDM could have been safely half portion of Engineering is their reasonable figure. Q.No. 56: If the B.F. did not have ready market on account of its size and had to be, therefore sold at abnormally low price, the price of the engineering as a component of the total price also should have come down proportionately. How do you justify lowering of the price of equipment without corresponding MOU in the price of the engineering? Ans. According to me, the technical documentation has more lasting value than the equipment. Therefore, the reduction in the engineering has not been much compare to the equipment. Q. No. 57. It is believed to be established fact that technology becomes obsolete faster than the equipment themselves. In instant case it is evident by the fact that the automation software has already become unusable and is required to be replaced. In this background how can you say that there should have been know lowering of the price in the engineering? Ans. In B.F. technology the technical development do take place and incorporated their in the existing furnace during relining. Similarly the basic documentation could be used with the changes to certai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... equipments out of the contracted price of 26 MDM." (emphasis added) 34. The Commissioner has proceeded on an ex facie erroneous basis that the "same goods" covered by the SN - ITP contract were sold to the appellant by SN under the subject contracts. As would be apparent from what is stated hereinabove, this is contrary to the records. Some of the "same goods" were not sold or were not available to be sold by SN to TISCO. This fundamental error of fact makes the purported finding of the Commissioner erroneous on the fact of it and thus untenable. The Commissioner had therefore erred in holding that the price break-up contained in the said telex of February, 1988 did or could represent the correct break-up of the prices in the instant case. 35. The purported finding of the Commissioner that the contention of the appellant that the equipments were incomplete was allegedly not established and that on the contrary from the statements recorded and the evidence on record it was found that the Blast Furnace equipments were substantially completed is whol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tal percentage of tonnage of equipments procured and available against total requirement for the SN Project was of the ratio of approximately 56% to 44%; 56% being available from SN and 44% being the quantity which the appellant had to procure from elsewhere or manufacture by itself. Rejection of this relevant and material fact on incomprehensible and absurd reasoning as contained in the said order, clearly demonstrates the closed and predetermined mind with which the said order has been passed, ignoring relevant and material facts on record. 37. The Commissioner should have appreciated and erred in not doing so that even apart from the equipments supplied by SN being unused as against new and without performance guarantee, taking into account the shortfall in the equipments to be supplied by SN as against the equipments received or receivable under the SN Project, whereas there would be no reduction in the engineerings and drawings supplied, the ratio of 81% of the equipments would come down to approximately 46% as per the following calculation:- If 100% equipments make 81% of total cost ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rred to and relied upon in the order dated 3-4-1996. Reference may also be made in this respect to the Chartered Engineer's Certificates. These relevant materials have also been deliberately ignored. 41. It is relevant to note herein that although Mr. Sudheer, representative of EHI, whose inter se telex with EH (the agents of the foreign seller) has been relied upon, was summoned and statement of his recorded and relied upon, no question was put to him on the break up between MD-302 and MD-301. No particulars were also sought for from SN, the supplier of the goods and technical documents regarding the manner in which the break-up between MD-302 and 301 was arrived at, although the relied upon document at page 340 of Department's Paper Book - Volume II being a telex dated 23rd Dec., 1988 of SN to EH/TISCO, clearly evidences (para 1 of the said telex) that the break-up between the equipments and technical documents were made with the due approval and involvement of SN. 42. The purported finding in the said order that TISCO had found the areawise price break-up for the equipments on the basis of SN-ITP contract acceptable and had submitted to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....terials. These can be no manner of doubt whatsoever that price of equipments coupled with performance guarantee and/or guarantee against defects and deficiencies cannot be equated with price and equipments where no such guarantees are made available. The said order, however, completely overlooks this relevant and material factor. In this regards reliance is placed upon the decision of this Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of A.N. Gupta & Co. v. Collector of Customs - 1994 (69) E.L.T. 58 (T). 45. As acknowledged by the Commissioner as well as his predecessor in their respective orders and as would be evident from, inter alia, the agreements in question, this was a "distress sale" by SN. This also definitely was a reason which resulted in reducing the cost of equipments. However, this relevant material has also not been considered. 46. It is submitted that in paragraph 17 of its judgment (at p 250 thereof), the Supreme Court has also observed as follows : - "Sub-rules (3) and (4) of Rule 9 clearly provide that additions to the price actually paid or payable is permissible under the Rules if based on objective and quantifiable data and no addit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sp; Referring to the above-quoted observation, the Supreme Court in its judgment (paragraph 17 at page 249) inter alia, observed as follows:- "........The Tribunal has not doubted the genuineness of the contracts entered into between the appellant and SNP. Rather it has observed vide para 10.2 of its order that entering into two contracts (MD 301 and MD 302) was a legal necessity". The aforesaid clearly sets at rest the genuineness and the bona fide of the two contracts and as regards the requirement therefore. 49.2 Further, from the relevant documents on record, it would also be seen that each of these two contracts, MD 301 and MD 302 were approved by the concerned authorities of the Government of India, being the Ministry of Steel and the Ministry of Industries, Secretariat for Industrial Approvals, Department of Industrial Development. The relevant documents evidencing the aforesaid are at pages 268-270 (Appellant's Paper Book-Volume I) pages 251 to 254 (Appellant's Paper Book-Volume I) and at pages 373-376 (Department's Paper Book-Volume-II). It would be seen therefrom that such approvals were granted upon du....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t when goods, though liable to confiscation are not available for confiscation, they can neither be confiscated, nor can any redemption fine be imposed. In this respect reliance is placed upon, inter alia the following decisions : (a) HCL Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, 2000 (126) E.L.T. 808 (T) para 34 This decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court - 2001(130) E.L.T. A266 (SC) (b) Associate Marketing Services v. Commissioner of Customs (Airport), Chennai, 2006 (195) E.L.T. 287 (T) Para 2 52.3 Further and in any event, it is also settled law that on readjudication upon remand, the favourable directions obtained by the appellant from the Adjudicating Authority in the original proceedings cannot be disturbed nor can there be enhancement of penalty or find in such remand proceedings. In this respect reliance is placed upon the following decisions :- (a) Commissioner of Customs v. Hitachi Chemicals, 1999 (113) E.L.T. 847 (T) Paragraph 3 - relying upon the decision of Supreme Court in Banshidhar Lakshmi Prasad v. Union of In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....LCs) and related technical documents imported by the appellant from M/s. Siderurgia Nacional, Portugal (SN). 3.2 The allegation of the Revenue is under-valuation of the Blast Furnace Equipment by transferring a part of the value of the equipment to the value of Technical documents with a view to evading appropriate amount of customs duty. 3.3 However, before going into the allegation of under-valuation, a few relevant facts need to be seen for proper appreciation and judicious consideration: (i) Sometime in 1981, M/s. Italimpianti, Italy (ITP, for short) had supplied to SN equipments for blast furnace, LD converter, continuous billet casting machines, wire rod mill, torpedo ladle cars, etc. together with related Engineering and technical documents for expansion of steel plant in Portugal. However, before the equipments could be installed, Portugal decided to join European Economic Community. Consequently, Portugal could not have expanded its steel making capacity. M/s. SN had, therefore, to cancel its investment plan and sell the equipments and materials lying unused from 1981 to 1986. For this purpose....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... MD 301 - agreement for supply of Technical Documentation (page 36 of PB, Vol.-I), and (b) MD 302 - Agreement for sale of Equipments and Materials (page 98 of PB, Vol.-I.) The overall price as per this contract was fixed at DM 26 millions being : - DM 13.5 millions FOB Lisbon relating to the Equipments; - DM 12.5 millions relating to the Technical Documentation. (vi) Pursuant to the aforesaid sale contract, technical documents covered by MD 301 arrived at Calcutta and was cleared at 'nil' rate of duty under sub-heading No. 4906.00 of the Customs Tariff vide Bills of Entry dtd. 13-3-90 and 11-4-90. However, the appellant sought for registration of its contract MD 302 under Project Imports Regulations, 1986 with the Custom House, Paradeep which was duly allowed enabling it to avail the benefit of concessional rate of duty for project imports. Against this contract MD 302, the first consignment of part of the equipment arrived at the Paradeep Port and was assessed provisional....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....were also imposed on the other noticees. (x) The above order of the Commissioner was appealed in the Tribunal by all the aggrieved parties, i.e., TISCO and two of its employees Dr. J. J. Irani & Shri S.L Srivastava and M/s. M.N. Dastur & Co. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material, had held that the value of the equipments would be the entire contract price of DM 26 millions. However, as the Commissioner had determined the value of the equipments at DM 21-2747826086 millions and the Deptt. did not file any appeal against the same, the duty liability of the appellant would be determined pegging the value of the equipment as determined by the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal also reduced the penalty to Rs. 4 crores from Rs. 5 Crores imposed on the appellant, TISCO. The appeals of Dr. J.J. Irani, Shri S.L. Srivastava and M/s. M.N. Dastur & Co. were allowed by the Tribunal by setting aside the penalties imposed on them vide its order dtd. 20-8-97 reported in 1999 (109) E.L.T. 263 (T). (xi) Aggrieved by the Tribunal's order, the appellant TISCO filed an appeal in the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Vide its order dtd. 16-2-2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t that outset, it may be noted that EHI, vide its letter dtd. 13-8-86 to the appellant, offered for sale various equipments of a steel plant along with all related drawings and engineering at a price of DM 82.1 millions on "as is, where is" condition. The appellant was, however, interested only in the blast furnace equipment and the 3 TLCs price of which, as per the offer letter, was DM 29.9 millions (i.e. DM 28 millions plus DM 1.9 millions). This price was negotiated personally by Dr. J.J. Irani, the then Managing Director of TISCO with the Chairman of SN at the former's office at Jamshedpur and finally it was settled at DM 26 millions as may be seen from his statement dtd. 10-11-92 (in answer to question No. 1 at page 196 of the PB Vol.-I filed by the appellant). 3.5 From the above, it would be quite evident that both the offered price and the negotiated price was a composite one without any break-up between the equipment and the drawings and engineering. However, from the documentary evidences on record which have not been disputed at any stage, it would appear that right from the beginning the appellant was insisting upon break-up of the total price betwee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o of the prices at which these were imported which was 52:48. 3.9 The above contention of the appellant does not merit acceptance. The appellant ignores the fact that the goods were sold on the basis of "as is, where is". The appellant also ignores the fact that SN supplied only the related technical documents and not all the technical documents as received by it from ITP. This is quite evident from the Agreement MD-301 which clearly states that the seller and the buyer have agreed upon the present Agreement for supply of Technical Documentation for one 1578.5 cum Blast Furnace and three 200 Ton Torpedo Ladles which is listed under Annexure-I (List of Drawings, Manuals and Technical Specifications). From this Agreement itself, it is established beyond any doubt that only the related technical documents were supplied to the appellant. TISCO had indicated that it was interested in one BF and 3 TLCs only. Therefore, in order to evaluate their cost, it had asked for break-up of prices under Equipment, Refractory and Engineering. The break-up given for this purpose was evidently only for the equipments sought....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....documents would show that TISCO was persistently trying to impress upon SN to agree to make two separate agreements - one for the engineering and the other for the equipment supply. The fact that SN was not inclined to have two separate contracts is quite clear from SN's Telex dtd. 23-12-88 to TISCO (at page 339/340 of the Deptt.'s PB, Part-II). Para 1 of this Telex reads as follows : "1. In principle there shall be only one contract. However and if necessary, we can consider the separation in different chapters of the matters related to equipment and technical documentation". SN could not have agreed to two separate contracts as there could not be one contract for 'equipments' and the other for 'technical documents' which included documents such as, operation manuals, maintenance manuals which are supplied along with the equipments during the course of normal trade. Without such documents, the equipments were not saleable and as such there could not have been separate contracts for sale of equipments and such technical documents. 3.14 As a result of constant persuasion, finally on 11-10-89, the sale contract was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the proceedings. No fault can, therefore, be found with the impugned order. 3.17 While referring to Annexure-I to MD-301 (Agreement for supply of Technical Documentation), the ld. Counsel for the appellant stated that the blast furnace equipment was not complete and many of the parts were required to be procured/manufactured in India and for which drawings and technical documents were also supplied by SN. 3.18 In this connection, EHI's offer letter dtd. 13-8-86 may once again be referred to. From this letter, it may be seen that amongst various other items, one blast furnace equipment exclusive of blowers was also offered for sale. It would, therefore, appear that except for the blowers, the blast furnace equipment was complete. The fact that the blast furnace equipment was substantially complete is quite evident from the statements of Dr. J.J. Irani, M.D. of TISCO and Shri C.R. Parthasarathi, Technical Director of M/s. M.N. Dastur & Co. and Shri N.R. Sudheer, Marketing Manager of EHI. 3.19 In his statement dtd. 10-11-92 (page 196 of the Paper Book Vol. I), Dr. J.J. Irani had stated in answer to question No. 9 that they could build complete blast furnac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....therefore, is substantially complete. In his statement dtd. 13-10-91 (at page 222 of PB, Vol. I), in answer to question No. 27, Shri Sudheer has also stated that the equipment supplied by SN to TISCO was complete in all respects. From the above evidences, there cannot be any manner of doubt that the blast furnace was substantially complete. 3.21 During the hearing, a grievance was made by the ld. Counsel that the appellant had submitted written notes of arguments under cover of its letter dtd. 22-9-01 for consideration by the Commissioner. However, the Commissioner has considered only a few of them and not all. Perusal of the impugned order particularly from paras 16 to 23 would clearly show that all the relevant submissions made by the appellant have been duly considered by the Commissioner. Hence the grievance is not genuine and is unacceptable. 3.22 At the conclusion of his submissions, the ld. Counsel for the appellant pointed out that in the earlier adjudication order dtd. 3-4-96, no redemption fine was imposed. However, in the present impugned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the provisions under the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The matter has been remanded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to specifically consider the plea of the department as to whether the value of the equipments has been bifurcated by transferring a part of the value to the value of engineering documents and drawings. The question, therefore, in the fresh proceedings before us is limited to determination as to whether the declared value of the impugned equipments is correct or part of its value is shown as value of the engineering documents and drawings. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also held that the plea of the Revenue regarding under-valuation of the impugned equipments should be examined on the basis of material already available in the record. As such, there is no scope for either considering any additional material or directing the adjudicating authority to obtain any fresh evidence. The task of the Tribunal, therefore, in this 2nd round of litigation lies within a very narrow compass. 5. We find that the department's case regarding under-valuation of the equipments is based on its conclusion that the appellants were themselves interested in the purchase of the equipment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....agreement for purchase of new/unused equipment from the original supplier from Italy. It is the department's case that the appellants had kept the customs authority in dark about MD-301 sub-contract and had not submitted copy of the sub-contract MD-301 to the customs authorities in Paradeep and the technical documents under MD-301 was cleared from the Air Cargo Complex at Kolkata at Nil rate of duty. 7. In view of the foregoing as well as other attendant circumstances, the department has concluded that the appellants have purchased substantially the same equipments with necessary documentation which was initially sold by the Italian manufacturer to SN and subsequently resold to the appellants and that the total amount has been divided under two sub-contracts showing a lower value for the equipments which has been suppressed by transferring part of the value towards Foreign Collaboration Agreement and the technical documents. 8. After going through the case records, we note that no investigation has been carried out by the department to obtain any evidence from M/s. SN or from the Italian suppliers so as to verify whether the actual price paid for the equipments was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ransferred the same technical documentation under sub-contract MD-301, which it had earlier received from the Italian manufacturers. We also note that in the Telex dated 8-12-88, on the basis of break-up received from SN, EHI has clearly indicated that 19% of the value represented cost of engineering for the Blast Furnace and 6% of the value represented cost of the Torpedo Ladle Cars. 12.  In our view these percentages can be applied to the initial offer value of 28 Million DM for the Blast Furnace and 1.9 Million DM for the 3 Torpedo Ladle Cars as per the offer made by SN to the appellants for working out the value of engineering. Applying the percentages indicated in the Telex to the initial offer from SN, the engineering cost for the Blast Furnace comes to 5.32 Million DM (28 MDM x 19%) and the cost for the engineering for Torpedo Ladle Cars comes to 0.114 Million DM (1.9 MDM x 6%), both totalling 5.434 Million DM. We note that in place of the earlier offer of 28 + 1.9 = 29.9 Million DM, the equipments and the engineering have been sold at 26 Million DM. Attributing the reduction in the price entirely to the non-supply of the part of the equipments, and presuming that th....