Back
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND GOLD (CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MADRAS
V.P. Gulati, T.P. Nambiar, JJ.
Chirag Exports & Imports -Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Customs, Chennai -Respondent
Order Nos. 2458 to 2463/97 Appeal Nos. C/V-153 to 155 & 186/97, C/414 & 415/97, 2458 of 1997, 2463 of 1997, C/V-153 of 1997, 155 of 1997, 186 of 1997, C/414 of 1997, 415 of 1997
Decided On : 07-08-1997
Per Shri V.P.Gulati :
These appeals filed by both the importers and the department arises out of the common impugned order and are therefore taken up together for disposal.
2. The brief facts of the case are that M/s Chirag Exports & Imports (hereinafter referred to as importers) imported 3 consignments of Acrylic fibre from Korea invoiced at US $ 1 per kg. In the case of one of the consignments the invoice shown that the goods were of B grade Acrylic fibre. The authorities however, noticed that Acrylic fibre had been imported by other importers at higher price and took note of the price of the goods from countries other than Korea at a price of US $ 1.35 per kg. 1.70 per kg. and also one consignment from the same country i.e. Korea at US $ 1.47 per kg. The consignments priced at US $ 1.47 was imported under the DEEC scheme over three months prior to the importers' import in this case. The goods were tested by SITRA (South India Textile Research Association) an independent organisation set up by the Industry to ascertain the quality of the goods and the goods as tested by them, as seen from the order of the lower appellate authority were found to be sub-standard and they also opined that there was no standard method to not out the Acrylic fibre as A, B, or C grade and the test report also showed that there was difference between the subject consignment and prime quality Acrylic fibre. In view of what has been stated by the SITRA the learned original authority adopted the lowest of price in the range of price at which, the goods had been imported in India and the value of the same were fixed at US $ 1.35 per kg. Against this finding, the importers filed appeal before the lower appellate authority who while not accepting the price of US $ 1 per kg. fixed the value of the goods which had been found as sub-standard at US $ 1.16 per kg. The basis of his fixation of the price was the price differential that was obtained in the case of Arylic fibre of prime quality and the sub-standard quality as sold by M/s ICPL. a Government of India undertaking. He, therefore, allowed reduction of 21% from the price of US $ 1.47 per kg. the price at which the goods have been imported from Korea. The importers are in appeal against this fixation by the lower appellate authority while the Revenue filed appeals seeking enhancement of the value to US $ 1.35.
3. Shri A.K. JAYARAJ, learned Counsel for the importers has urged as under:
(a) Original authority had discarded the price of 1.47 US $ which was considered relevant for charge of under valuation as framed in the show cause and adopted another price of the goods of similar variety at which the goods had been imported from countries other than Korea. He has pleaded that once the original authority had adopted the same price which was held out to be forming the basis, there was no warrant to take into reckoning any other price at which the goods were imported from other countries.
(b) The lower appellate authority was in error in having adopted the norm of fixation of price based on the price differential prevailing between price of the prime quality and sub-standard quality in India in respect of similar variety of goods.
(c) In the absence of any acceptable basis shown by him or contemporaneous import of identical goods, the importers' invoice should have been accepted.
On a query from the Bench the learned Counsel fairly concedes that the importers are not in possession of manufacturers' invoice in respect of the goods. He has pleaded that no question in this regard was raised nor they were called upon then to produce the same. He has pleaded that the lower appellate authority erroneously stated that the manufacturers' invoice had not been produced and therefore the importers' invoice was not acceptable. On a perusal of the grounds of appeal, he however, concedes that in this regard, the importers have not made any grievance before the authorities. The learned Counsel has stressed that unless there
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
