TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (12) TMI 79
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. I have gone through the contents of the affidavit and all other relevant material documents available on record in the form of typed set of papers. I have also taken into consideration the various points raised by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties during the course of their arguments. 4. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, the only point that arises for consideration in this case is, as to whether there are any valid grounds to allow this writ petition or not. 5. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner, as seen from the affidavit are as follows : The petitioners company carries on business in importing Life Saving Equipment and they have imported "KOSAN ANGLE" BRAND FOLEY BALLOON (15,000 pcs) Catheters silicone treated sterile double pack of the CIF value Rs. 2,41,611/- equipment to U.S.$ 9000. The said Foley Balloon Catheter is a kind of suction catheter which finds place at S.No. 32 of Notification No. 208/81 as amended from time to time There was a dispute whether Foley Balloon Catheters would form part of the suction catheters. This was ultimately resolved by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtation or exportation, as the case may be, in the course of International trade, where the seller and the buyer have no interest in the business of each other and the price is the sole consideration for the sale. Here, there is no dispute about the price paid. The buyer and seller have no interest in the business of each other and the price is the sole consideration for the transaction. 6It is stated by the petitioner that Sec.. 14(1A) states that subject to the provisions of sub-section (1) the price referred to in that sub-section in respect of imported goods shall be determined in accordance with the rules made in this behalf. In exercise of the power conferred by Section 156 of the Customs Act, the Central Government enacted the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988. Under Rule 3, the value of the imported goods shall be the transaction value. Under Rule 4, the transaction value of the imported goods shall be the price actually paid which means the invoice value. Under the proviso to Sec. 14, the price shall be calculated with reference to the rate of exchange as in force on the date on which a Bill of Entry is presented under Section 46. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ximately. It is the case of the petitioner that the Department has no jurisdiction to adopt the Customs Exchange Rate for the dollar in respect of Life Saving Drugs and Equipments and that the Reserve Bank of India's circular, namely, LERMS clearly specified that the foreign exchange will be available at the official rate in respect of Imports for the Life Saving Drugs and Equipments. When that is the case, they cannot have another rate for arriving at the price. The Act does not say that the exchange rate should be the market rate for all imports. This would be an arbitrary and capricious exercise of power. According to the petitioner, when the Government has decided that the foreign exchange should be made available at the official rate for the import of Life Saving Drugs and Equipments, it would be arbitrary and capricious on the part of the Customs Authorities to state that while calculating the value, they could adopt some other rate for conversion of the Dollar, when that is not the rate at which the price was paid. The assessment that has been made on the Bill of Entry in so far as it relates to the increase of the valuation from Rs. 26.84 to Rs. 29.28 per U.S Dollar adoptin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... some other rate for conversion of the Dollar, when that is not the rate at which the price was paid, and that therefore the assessment that has been made on the Bill of entry in so far as it relates to the increase of the valuation from Rs. 26.84 to Rs. 29.28 per U.S. Dollar adopting the Customs Exchange Rate is void. It is vehemently argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the action of the Customs Authorities is without jurisdiction, as the price at which the goods were imported should be the criterion for the levy of duty, that the price should be calculated at the rate of exchange which has been actually paid by the Importer and not on the market rate on which the Customs Exchange Rate was presumably based, and that there cannot be one price for imports and another price for calculation of duty. Inter alia it is also contended by the petitioners that the Customs Authorities have misconstrued the true scope of Section 14(1), the proviso and Section 14(1A) of the Customs Act. They also contended that they have also misconceived the scope of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 and according to them the duty is leviable on the price paid, and that they cannot....