TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 1037
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssue is whether the price adopted for finalisation at the rate of US$101.43 PDMT, instead of the contract value of the export goods is justified. 2. The Appellant entered into contract for sale with the buyer located in China, as per contract dated 19.11.2009 the quantity to supplied was 20,000 from Haldia Port at the rate of 62.5 USD WMT and 25,000 WMT from Vizag Port at the rate of 62.5 USD. Another contract was entered dated 01.02.2010 for supply of 7000 WMT at the rate of 82.5 from Vizag Port. The contract further provided that Fe content should be minimum 61%, moisture 10% max and physical size 10 MM max. As per the contract, the Appellant filed shipping bill both at Haldia Port and also at Vishakhapatnam port. The vessel MV DONG JIN ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ificate of quality and certificate of weight dated 11.02.2011 and the provisional assessments, for finalisation. On verification of the certificates of quality and weight, the Fe content and moisture was found to have been tested as 60.61% and 6.30% respectively. Further the estimation of Iron Ore Fines above 10 mm size was found to be 5.74%. 6. The Assistant Commissioner, as per the commercial invoice found that the amount charged is US$ 65.75 and 82.5. Further found that the copy of commercial invoice is dated 14.01.2010, which is prior to the date of the 2 shipping bills by about 3 weeks. Further it appeared from the BRC that the Appellant exporter have also dispatched two more consignments vide shipping bill Nos. 5594216 dated 18.12.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n and the same is fit to be re-determined. Thereafter for determination of the export value by comparison method, as per Rule 4 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 and considering some adjustments, as the goods in the nature of Ore and exact comparison with all parameters in the circumstances is not possible, the authority moved onto Rule 5 which provides for computed value method, wherein the fact such as cost of production etc., are to be considered. There after he proceed to Rule 6 which specify that where the value of export goods cannot be determined under the provisions of Rule 4 and 5, the value shall be determined using reasonable means consistent with the principles and general provisions of the rules. Thereafter, he resorted to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... quality with that of the goods exported. * One contract is two port export and the said contract date is much earlier than the actual date of export. The other contract is one port export and FOB price is more than the earlier contract. * Opportunity to give clarification before finalizing assessment was not given. * When TV is in doubt, necessary clarification must be sought from the exporter. Only when clarification is not proper, the proper officer may reject the declared value. * The export goods were not a homogenous mixture. The test report of representative sample, cannot be taken as authentic. Additional duty on iron ore, working sheet provided to show the excess duty paid. * The appellant assailed the rejection of the tr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t is further urged that at the relevant time the duty for lumps in an export consignment of Iron Ore Fines, had been reduced from 15% advalorem, to 10% ad-valorem, and accordingly the duty have been calculated excessively. The relevant notification being 79/2008 - Cus dated 13.06.2008, as amended by Notification No. 147/2009 - Cus dated 24.12.2009. 12. Learned AR for Revenue relies on the impugned order and further urges that as the Appellant did not produce the copy of shipping bill for the goods loaded at Haldia Port. The Customs Authority, Vishakhapatnam was in dark about the exact quantity exported by the Appellant. It is further urged that Iron Ore Fines prices keep moving in the International Market, and the customs authority as per ....