TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (7) TMI 708
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Director of the appellant firm under Section 112(a) of the Act. He has filed Appeal No. C/27/2006 seeking to quash this penalty. 2. The facts of the case are that the appellant had imported a Computer to Plate Machine (CTP) model M-Andromeda A1300M under Bill of Entry No. 1988 dated 16-8-2002 and 'Composite Express RIP Software' under Bill of Entry No. 1987 dated 16-8-2002. The Bill of Entry No. 1988 also covered sample plates. The value of CTP machine with sample plates was declared as USD 14700. The value of the software was declared as USD 6860. On suspicion of undervaluation of the CTP machine for assessment, investigation was conducted by the SIIB of the Commissionerate visiting premises of M/s. Applied Mechanics & Systems, Chennai and the importer at Vijayawada, Hyderabad and Secunderabad. Statements were recorded from Shri Srinivas Babu, MD of the importer company and Shri K. Sanjay Srinivas, Director-in charge of marketing in M/s. Applied Mechanics & Systems. M/s. Applied Mechanics & Systems, Chennai were sole distributors for the Lithotech products. The impugned CTP machine was supplied by M/s. Lithotech, GmbH, Germany. 3. After due process of law, the Commissioner fou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nvoices and despatch of the goods. The Commissioner found that as per the price list of Andromeda CTP machines, the price ranged from 55224 Euros for a small size manual machine to 148000 Euros for a bigger size automatic machine. The price of the subject A1300M had to fall between these two prices. He found that the price of a CTP machine performing on thermal image settings imported through ACC, Hyderabad during March 2002 was declared as USD 85225 as in the manufacturer's invoice. Therefore, he found it logical to determine the instant machine working on violet laser plate setting at a price comparable to the price of the machine imported through ACC Hyderabad. The Tripartite Agreement had shown the price of Andromeda V1300M ranging from 961202 to 120150 Euros. Therefore, he inferred that the importer had negotiated the purchase price of the impugned machine at 72000 Euros. He did not find any strong reason to find that difference in descriptions V1300M and A1300M represented difference in configurations as represented. 5. In the appeal filed before the Tribunal, it is submitted that the appellant had not accepted the offer price of 72000 Euros for CTP A1300M, as the same was e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....utta v. South India Television (P) Ltd. [2007 (214) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)] and CC, New Delhi v. Prodelin India (P) Ltd. [2006 (202) E.L.T. 13 (S.C.)] in support of its claim on valuation. The demand of differential duty, interest, order of confiscation and penalty were not sustainable. The impugned order was liable to be set aside. 6. We have heard both sides. 7. We have carefully perused the case records and considered the submissions. We find that the Commissioner rejected the transaction value declared on suspicion that the same was under declared. There is no finding that in the instant case, the price declared was not the price actually paid or that the same was a special price owing to an abnormal discount, relationship with the seller or any condition governing its post import use. Assessable value was not determined with reference to price accepted for contemporaneous import of comparable goods. We find that in the circumstances, the Commissioner was bound to accept the declared value. 7.1 Valuation of goods traded across the borders of the country is governed by the provisions of Section 14 of the Customs Act. During the material period, the Section fixed the assessable value....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... M/s. Lithotech, M/s. Applied Mechanics and Systems Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Cystal Dot Scan Pvt. Ltd. to reject the invoice value. The agreement was not signed. Invoice value was suspected for the reason that proforma invoice and proper invoice were of the same date; unsigned copies of invoice were faxed by the supplier on 9-7-2002 and the actual invoice dated 4-7-2002 was received by the importer on 8-7-2002. We note that the SCN did not suggest any adverse inferences proposed to be drawn from these facts about the invoices. Commissioner also does not arrive at any convincing finding from these facts. The assessee's explanation that the initial offer of 72000 Euros was for a multiple facility model and the machine imported was a basic model to us plausible. This was rejected by the Commissioner. The import was first of such machine into India; the technology being new there were apprehensions about its acceptability and the price invoiced had been arrived at after negotiation. Coupled with the confirmation by the supplier that it had received USD 14700 for CTP machine and USD 6860 for the software, we find, was sufficient explanation for the invoice price. We also find that the endorse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the following observations : 6. We do not find any merit in this civil appeal for the following reasons. Value is derived from the price. Value is the function of the price. This is the conceptual meaning of value. Under Section 2(41), "value" is defined to mean value determined in accordance with Section 14(1) of the Act. Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 is the sole repository of law governing valuation of goods. The Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 have been framed only in respect of imported goods. There are no rules governing the valuation of export goods. That must be done based on Section 14 itself. In the present case, the Department has charged the respondent-importer alleging mis-declaration regarding the price. There is no allegation of mis-declaration in the context of the description of the goods. In the present case, the allegation is of under-invoicing. The charge of under-invoicing has to be supported by evidence of prices of contemporaneous imports of like goods. It is for the Department to prove that the apparent is not the real. Under Section 2(41) of the Customs Act, the word "value" is defined in relation to any goods to mean the value determined in accordance ....