TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (2) TMI 211
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in usual course of business, the Appellant entered into an agreement with M/s. Ria Multiple Enterprises, Malaysia for shipment of high precision stainless steel balls of 6.35 mm; that the present market value (PMV) was declared to be Rs. 1.36 for each 6.35 mm S.S. ball and Rs. 0.69 for each 3.17 mm balls in the Shipping Bills; that the consignments were exported between May and August, 1999; that the goods exported by them were of export quality and were a high precision items used for delicate bearings and other sophisticated engineering products; that the goods were as per AISI specification No. 316; that payments of all the 16 consignments has been received; that on account of delay in assessment, they filed a Writ Application in which C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sis of local market price of the goods which do not represent the goods exported by the Appellants; that there is no case in the notice that the value was not in the ordinary course of trade; that the transaction value is required to be accepted as the contract entered into by and between the appellants and the foreign buyers do not fall in any exception as provided under Section 14 of the Customs Act; that there is no instance of any export at a lower value than what is declared by them and, therefore, the allegation of over-invoicing or mis-declaration of value must fail. He, further, mentioned that the PMV of the goods had been disputed on the basis of a statement and/or quotation taken from Mr. Rajesh Gupta of M/s. Kwality Ball Co., Jai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... taken by the writ petitioner, if necessary, at the time of assessment"; that the High Court also ordered that "assessment shall be done in accordance with law," that therefore, the contention of the Appellants that the High Court had directed to accept the PMV is not correct. The learned DR also submitted that though claimed by the Appellants that the impugned goods were precision items intended for very sophisticated use, there was no mention of the quality/specifications of the goods in any of the relevant documents; that no evidence of sale of similar goods at more or less the same price had been produced by the Appellants; that the remittances actually started only after the enquiry was initiated by the D.R.I.; that as the Appellant th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....exports were also of the same PMV. The Revenue had not rebutted this fact. The Revenue has gone into the cost of raw materials and cost of manufacture and has come to the conclusion that the price of steel balls cannot exceed Rs. 500 per kg. to Rs. 525/- per kg. It is not the case of the Revenue that the Appellants themselves were manufacturing the impugned goods and exporting the same. The PMV, in our view, cannot be challenged by going into the cost of manufacture. Market enquiry into the prices of the steel balls of size 6.35 mm and 3.17 mm conforming to AISI : 316 grade should have been ascertained from the market which has not been done. The burden to prove that PMV is inflated one is on the Department which has not been discharged. It....