2007 (4) TMI 56

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ting to Appeal No. £/513/04, in brief, are as follows: (i) The appellant company imported rock phosphate through Bhavnagar port which is a tidal port. The consignments were unloaded from mother vessel to barges at the anchorage point. (ii) The department proposed to include the transportation charges from anchorage point to jetty of the port in the assessable value. (iii) But the original authority vide his order dated 28-3-03 held that: "…….all the actual expenses incurred from anchorage point to jetty and till the dumping ground etc. have been included in the CIF value of imported goods instead of 1% landing charges. I also find that the statutory position is very clear on the issue of landing charges to be added to arriv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... claimed refunds in pursuance of favourable order of the Original authority dated 28-3-03 which was rejected as pre-mature by the order dt. 28-4-04 of the original authority on the ground that the Department is on appeal against the order dt. 28-3-03. (ii) The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the party's appeal holding that the proceedings started by the refund claim has become unfructous as the appeal filed by the Department against the order dt. 28-3-03 has been allowed by him. 5. The learned Advocate for the appellant submits that the issue of transportation charges for use of barges for carrying the cargo from mother vessel to the jetty stands decided in favour of party by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Ispat Industries Ltd. v. C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d paid by the buyer from the foreign port to the Indian port. Hence, a further addition to the transport charges under Rule 9(2)(a) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 is in our opinion clearly impermissible. 60. In the impugned order dated 7-3-01, the Tribunal has based its decision on its conclusion that the place of import was the Dharamtar jetty and not the BFL (vide paragraphs 9 to 18 of the Tribunal's order). Without commenting on the correctness or otherwise of this view, we are of the opinion that whether we treat the place of import as BFL or the Dharamtar jetty it will make no difference to the conclusion we have reached viz, that charges for transport of the goods by barges from BFL to Dharamtar jetty cannot be included in th....