TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (7) TMI 61
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Order-in-Original and passed the impugned order. The appellants challenge the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. Shri B. Anil Kumar, the learned Advocate, appeared for the appellants and Shri K. Sambi Reddy, the learned JDR, for the Revenue. 4.The learned Advocate urged the following points :- (i) The Commissioner (Appeals) has given a decision contrary to his own findings. In para 4 of the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has accepted the submission of the appellant that third party imports should not be considered since the appellants were Gold Certified Partners. In spite of giving such a finding, the Commissioner (Appeals) concurs with the order of the Adjudicating Authority and upholds the Transaction Value in terms of Rule 10A read with Rule 5 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 which would mean that the value of the imported goods is to be enhanced to Rs. 1,03,039/- (ii) The differential demand was proposed on the basis of contemporaneous imports by third party and not on the imports made by the appellants themselves. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er authorities ought not to have rejected the Transaction Value. (viii) The Apex Court, in the case of Basant Industries v. Additional Collector of Customs, Bombay - 1996 (81) E.L.T. 195 (S.C.), has held that the relationship between the supplier and the importer has to be kept in mind because it is a matter of common knowledge that a price which is offered by a supplier to an old customer may be different from a price which the same supplier offers to a totally new customer. In the present case, the appellants have a global contract whereunder they purchase various CISCO products for supplying to their customers throughout the world and they are considered as Gold Certified Partner for CISCO. Therefore, the discount enjoyed by the appellants is quite normal. (ix) The Tribunal, in the case of Iron Master India Pvt. Ltd. v. CC, New Delhi - 2002 (150) E.L.T. 599 has held that Transaction Value cannot be rejected solely on the basis of prices at which another importer has imported the same goods. The view of the Tribunal has been maintained by the Apex Court as reported in 2003 (157) E.L.T. A151 (S.C.). (x) The findings of the lower authori....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Authorities to arbitrarily reject the Transaction Value. (xiv) The Board has issued a Circular No. 82/2002-Cus.V dated 3-12-2002 clarifying that lower prices are acceptable in case of sales made as OE parts. The Board has also clarified that to reject the Transaction Value, the onus is on the Department to establish that price is not the sole consideration for the sale/transaction. (xv) The Adjudicating Authority has ignored the fact that the appellants have been importing CISCO products as OE parts and, therefore, there will be a difference in the prices supplied as OE parts and supply of the same as spare parts. The Circular of the Board cited supra clearly accepts the dual price. (xvi)The case of the department is based on the imports at Mumbai and Chennai. The Adjudication Order has been passed without furnishing any details about these imports and the copies of the documents in respect of these invoices and the Bills of Entry have not been supplied to the appellants. Thus Principles of Natural Justice have been violated. The appellants requested the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore to provide the details of imports referred to in the order and the copi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; EXHIBIT S: Software License Agreement 9. EXHIBIT H: FAR Clauses We find that at Sl. No. 3 in the above list is the Discount Schedule. We find that the appellant, who is an Integrator, is a Gold Certified Partner of CISCO. In the Agreement relating to Discount, it is seen that Integrator's Discount will be set based on the certification level Integrator has been awarded at the time it submits a particular purchase order for products. We also find that when the Integrator's certification level is Gold, the Integrator's discount will be 42%. The appellant has explained why 42% discount was given to HDFC. They have actually produced the corresponding e-mail correspondence, purchase order, etc. indicating 42% discount. They have also explained that MTNL is purchaser of large number of equipments and the appellant had requested the foreign supplier to offer additional discount and it had been agreed by them to offer a discount of 55%. After going through the documents, we are satisfied that the foreign supplier has given 55% discount for impugned goods meant for MTNL. It is also seen that in every purchase order, the ultimate customer who is going to....