TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (9) TMI 19
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er and cotter pin declaring unit price of Rs. 11.00, Rs. 19.20, Rs. 11.40, Rs. 14.80 and Rs. 18.30, in 1995 through Mumbai port, while they attempted to export brake screw @ Rs. 5.60 per piece, handle lever @ Rs. 7.35 per piece and cotter pin at Rs. 8.75 per piece through Madras port. Enquiries conducted by DRI, Madras, revealed that these items were available for sale at much lower prices, viz. Rs. 0.64, Rs. 0.90, Rs. 0.68 and Rs. 0.78 per piece respectively. 3. During October, 1995, M/s. Sobat India Ltd. exported gaskets at a declared price of Rs. 7.55/Rs. 6.45/Rs. 4.95per piece. 4. From the above, it appeared that the goods exported were grossly over-invoiced to such an extent that the drawback amount claimed was in excess of the market value of the goods; In terms of Section 76(1) (b) of the Customs Act, no drawback is admissible in respect of any goods whose market price is less than the drawback amount claimed. Therefore, the export goods were not entitled to drawback. On this basis, a show cause notice dated 25.4.1996 was issued to all three exporters to recover the drawback of Rs. 1,13, 52,069/- paid to M/s. Unimac (I) Ltd., Rs. 39,99,986/- paid to M....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....valid evidence of overvaluation, findings of DRI, Madras with respect to quality of goods exported from Madras must be accepted and compared with the goods already exported from Mumbai, the DRI, Madras, had obtained quotations by showing samples of goods detained which prove that the prices were highly overvalued, that enquiries conducted from local market and Moscow customs revealed that the goods were over-invoiced above the market value and, therefore, the provision of Section 76 (1) (b) are attracted for disallowing drawback and that the goods were cleared in Russia by change in the name of the consignee and rates, quantity and value of goods, which is not proper or legally permissible. 8. We find that the weight of the goods exported in the instant, case is clearly different from those of the Madras exports. The details are as under:- (a) Unimac Weight per piece (gms) Weight per piece (gms) Mumbai &nb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Handle lever 12.57/ 19 7.73/6.97 Cotter pin 20 18.74 (c) Sobat: Exported Gaskets from Mumbai Admittedly no gaskets were exported from Madras Thus,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lue is taken as correct and drawback has been correctly claimed. 10. Further, there is no evidence that like goods were exported by other at different prices. The lower value declared by Russian importers in their country is not relevant to hold that the exporters/respondents overvalued their goods, in the light of the Tribunal's order in Frost international Ltd. & Others (Order Nos. A/704-7l3/WZB/2006 dated 8.8.2006), and further there is no evidence to show that the value declared in Russia was correct. FOB value of export goods cannot be determined, with reference to the market price in India, in the light of the language of Section 14 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962, which provides that the value of import or export goods shall be deemed to be the price at which such or like goods are ordinarily sold or offered for sale for delivery at the time and place of importation or exportation as the case may be, in the course of international trade, and in the light of the Tribunal's order in Frost International supra. 11. We also note that the case of the department is based on quotations and not on actual sale transactions, and quotations cannot be relied upon for the p....