TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1983 (11) TMI 276
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Customs, Bombay. 2. For a proper appreciation of the issues involved in the present appeal, it would be useful to briefly narrate the facts of the case. A contract was entered into between The Minerals & Metals Trading Corporation of India (MMTC), hereinafter called the Buyer, and M/s. Empresa Minera Del Peru (MINERO-PERU), hereinafter called the Seller, and this contract is dated 6-3-1972. As per the terms of the contract, the seller was to supply to MMTC Electrolytic Copper Wire Bars corresponding to ASTM B5/43 specifications. The price clause is also relevant and is reproduced below :- *           *           * &e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....une 1974, (Stg. GBP 1,021.10) per M/T CIF Bombay.     999.923 M/T Stg. GBP 747,926.38" *           *           *           * The price of GBP 474.91 per MT adopted for the quantity of 500.000 MT was not accepted for assessment purposes by the lower authorities, but the price of the balance quantity of 499.923 MT was, however, accepted. For the quantity of 500.000 MT referre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....after all the relevant documents connected therewith are added together. According to him, therefore, the invoice price for the balance lot of 500.000 MT should have been accepted for assessment purposes, being in conformity with the provisions of Section 14 of the Customs Act. He also emphasised the fact that the appellants have no special relationship with the foreign suppliers of the goods, and all relevant documents pertaining to the transaction in 1983 were made available to the Customs authorities. He, therefore, submitted that the contract price should be as mentioned in the invoice, which correctly reflected the actual value of the goods under the Act, and the action of the lower authorities was justified in enhancing the same. 6....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned in accordance with the terms of the contract, which were obtaining at the time the goods were supplied and the authorities below had no power to question the validity or otherwise of the contract, more particularly when it is not a contract between private parties. Shri Ohri's contention would have some substance had there been any other contemporaneous import of the like goods at the same time. However, in the present case, there is no dispute between the two parties that at the relevant time there were no contemporaneous imports of the like goods, and therefore, the only criterion for determination of the value was the value of the goods which had been imported by the appellants. Further, value thereof had been stipulated by virtue of....