TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 282
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he export of 10,500 WMT of Iron Ore Fines of 61% Fe content through MV Vessel BK Duke under contract dt.04.10.2010 to a buyer in Hong Kong, China. The declared price was assessed provisionally, pending test and submission of final documents on execution of PD/ITC bond and securing revenue deposit towards differential duty between declared unit price of USD 115.00 and final duty to be ascertained and differential moisture content between declared content of 9% and 3%, which was adopted by Visakhapatnam Customs House for differential duty. On finalization, by OIO dt.04.09.2012, the Original Authority found the declared price to be in variance with the contemporaneous export prices and adopted USD 128 PDMT FOB pertaining to M/s Rungta Sons for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d copies of published journals, wherein the price for 60/61% Fe content was mentioned as 130 USD. He has further submitted that Rule 4(2) of the Export Valuation Rules provides that in determining the value of export goods under sub-rule (1), the proper officer shall make such adjustments as appear to him reasonable taking into consideration the relevant factors including (i) difference in dates of exportation, (ii) difference in commercial levels and quantity levels, (iii) difference in composition quality and design between the goods to be assessed and the goods with which they are being compared and (iv) difference in domestic freight and insurance charges depending on the place of exportation. But the Deputy Commissioner has not made an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the impugned order, it is clear that the dispute is not regarding the Fe content or moisture but relates to the acceptance of the unit price of USD 128 PDMT FOB instead of USD 115 PDMT FOB. 6. The adjudicating authority has adopted the figure of Rungta Sons Pvt Ltd i.e., USD 128 FOB. From the table of contemporaneous prices mentioned in the order of the adjudicating authority, it is clear that there were three prices below and two prices above the declared price of appellant but the adjudicating authority has chosen the highest price. It cannot be said to be contemporaneous, especially in a situation where no doubt has been raised about declared value. 7. The observations expressed by the appellate authority regarding the assessment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....port goods shall be the transaction value of such goods, that is to say, the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to India for delivery at the time and place of importation, or as the case may be, for export from India for delivery at the time and place of exportation, where the buyer and seller of the goods are not related and price is the sole consideration for the sale subject to such other conditions as may be specified in the rules made in this behalf: Provided that such transaction value in the case of imported goods shall include, in addition to the price as aforesaid, any amount paid or payable for costs and services, including commissions and brokerage, engineering, design work, royalties and l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nted under section 50." 9. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Century Metal Recycling (P) Ltd Vs UOI [2019 (6) SCC 655], inter alia, held that 'rejection of the transaction value declared by importer without giving cogent and good reasons in terms of Section 14(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 and Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007, not permissible. Enquiry prior to such rejection and giving of valid reasons for doing so by proper officer, is necessary. Requirement of giving reasons, both at the preliminary as well as the second stage of enquiry i.e., when doubting the truth or accuracy of the value declared, mandatory in nature'. 10. Transaction value/invoice price corroborated by sal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....voke such a provision it is incumbent upon the Assessing Officer to give reasons as to why the transaction value declared in the Bills of Entry was being rejected; to establish that the price is not the sole consideration; and to give the reasons supported by material on the basis of which the Assessing Officer arrives at his own assessable value." 11. In the case of CC, Goa Vs VGM Exports [2013 (291) ELT 572 (Tri- Mumbai)], it has been held as under. "6.1 Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 stipulates that for the purpose of the Customs Tariff Act, the value of the exported goods shall be the transaction value of such goods, that is to say, the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export from India for del....