2004 (5) TMI 219

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the price mentioned above. The contemporaneous prices for the same or similar goods was US$ 1800 to 1850 PMT CIF from the same and other suppliers. The appellant, during the course of proceedings before the original authority was shown two invoices for similar goods imported during the time when the appellant's consignment was sought to be cleared. However the goods under import were not identical to the goods imported under the invoices referred to above. The lower authority accordingly enhanced the value of the goods to US $ 1700 PMT CIF in terms of Section 14(1)A of the Customs Act read with the valuation rule for purpose of levy of duty. The lower authority arrived at this value after taking into consideration the difference in grade e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s Pvt. Ltd. v. CC [1992 (60) E.L.T. 43] wherein the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta held that the price at the time of contracting is relevant and subsequent price increase at or near the time of shipment or importation is not relevant. He also relied on the case of Sai Impex v. CC [1992 (62) E.L.T. 616] wherein the Tribunal held that the manufacturer's invoice if available and if genuine is the best evidence of the price of the goods and there is no need to go to other contemporaneous imports of identical or similar goods. He argued that since the appellant has produced the contract entered into with the supplier who himself is a manufacturer the price declared should have been accepted. It was also argued that the price arrived at by the l....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the price. 5. We observe that the appellant waived show cause notice and sought personal hearing before the Assistant Commissioner. During the course of hearing the appellant was put on notice that the department wished to rely on two invoices where the price shown was US$ 1800 to US$ 1850. The appellant was shown the two invoices in support of the department's contention. The appellant had no explanation in regards to this evidence. The appellant cannot argue that even though the invoices were shown they were not furnished to them. They had all the opportunity to produce evidence in their favour during the course of the hearing before the original authority. The principles of natural justice were duly complied with. As per the argument th....