TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 358
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d., [hereinafter referred to as "M/s. IOCL"] cannot be accepted as they are admittedly related persons. In proceedings initiated against the appellants, original authority vide order, dated 25.06.2003 held that appellants are related persons in terms of sub-rule 2 of Rule 2 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988 [hereinafter referred to as "CVR"), re-determined the value of PCAG sold to M/s. IOCL during Dec. '01 to Oct. '02 at Rs. 48.14, confirmed differential duty demand of Rs. 49,21,772/- along with interest liability thereon and also imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on the appellants. Appeal filed by the appellants was rejected by Commissioner (Appeals) vide impugned order dated 26.07.2004. H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 29.75 per kg. and Rs. 37.44 per kg; (v) Adoption of Rs. 48.14 per kg. Applicable, only to the 40% IPA grade for the other two grades viz., sub-standard/claimless and normal 2% IPA grades, is clearly in disregard of the specific prohibition on adoption, the highest of the two alternative prices under Rule (vi) Even the cost of production methodology permitted by Rule 8(iii-a) ibid, permits only adoption of the values of identical or similar goods; (vii) It is submitted that the cost of material for 40% IPA content AGC was higher in comparison to the normal 2% IPA grade or the substandard/ClaimIess grades as the IPA content is considerably higher in the 40% IPA grade; and (viii) A single clearance of 2 MTS of 40% IPA content has been ado....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st from the latter as a one-time requirement for research and experimental purposes. It is not the case that the appellants has been clearing AGC with 40% IPA to other non-related customers. It is also not the allegation that they are clearing AGC of 2% IPA to other nonrelated customers at the price of Rs. 48.14 per. Kg. 7. This being the case, the one-time clearance of a very small quantity of AGC, that too of a strength of 20 times the normal IPA strength normally cleared to them cannot be translated into the notional transaction value for other predominant clearances of 2% strength AGC. In fact, appellant has contended that they have cleared more than 1,000 MTS of other grade. 8. We also find that in an earlier Order dated 15.10.2003 i....