1. Importation dispute — Identity of goods — Weight and price differences. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1995 Supreme(SC) 698
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.P.Jeevan Reddy : S.C.Sen
Deepak Electronic Private Limited, Bombay
Versus
Collector Of Customs, Bombay
Case No. : .
Date of Decision : 5/20/95
Advocates Appeared: Sorabjee Soli J.
Advocates:
SOLI J.SORABJI
SOLI J.SORABJI
The court held that if a material difference in weight and price is raised to contest whether goods are "identical," the tribunal must specifically adjudicate upon that issue according to law.
Headnote:(A) Customs Law - Determination of identical goods - Difference in weight and price - Appellant contended that the weight of goods was significantly less than the comparison goods, leading to a price difference, and thus the goods could not be regarded as identical - Since the tribunal had not specifically dealt with this aspect despite a reference in its order, it is appropriate that the tribunal examines the issue according to law. (Para 1)
Facts of the case:
The appellant challenged a finding regarding the identity of imported goods, arguing that a difference in weight compared to another import resulted in a price difference, meaning the goods were not identical. This contention was raised before various authorities and the tribunal, but the tribunal did not provide a specific determination on this point.
Findings of Court:
The court observed that the specific aspect of weight difference and its impact on the classification of goods as identical had not been dealt with by the tribunal.
Issues: Whether the difference in weight and price between two sets of goods precludes them from being treated as identical goods.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a specific material contention regarding the physical characteristics and resulting price of goods is raised to challenge their status as identical, the tribunal must specifically adjudicate upon that issue according to law.
Result: Appeals disposed of.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Difference in weight results in price variation, rendering goods non-identical. (Para 1 )
3. The tribunal failed to specifically address the appellant's contention regarding weight and price differences. (Para 1 )
4. Material contentions regarding the identity of goods based on weight and price must be adjudicated by the tribunal. (Para 1 )
5. Appeals disposed of with directions to the tribunal to decide the issue of weight and price differences. (Para 1 , 2 )
6. When should a tribunal reconsider a matter regarding the identity of imported goods?
When a material contention, such as whether differences in weight and price render goods non-identical, has not been specifically dealt with by the authorities or the tribunal. (Para 1 )
(1) MR. Soli J. Sorabjee, learned counsel for the appellant says that though the appellant contended from the very beginning before every authority that the weight of his goods is far less than the weight of the goods imported by Hariram Gobindram, the said aspect has not been dealt with by any of the authorities under the Act. Learned counsel submits that because of the difference in weight there is a difference in the price and, therefore, the two goods cannot be regarded as identical goods. Since this aspect has not been dealt with specifically by the tribunal, though there is a reference to it at page 4 of its Order, we think it is appropriate that the said aspect is gone into by the tribunal. The appellant may raise this question before the tribunal and if it is so raised, the tribunal shall deal with it according to law and dispose it of.
(2) THE appeals are disposed of accordingly.
