Commissioner of Customs Vs Rajendra Textiles (CESTAT Chennai)
CESTAT Chennai held that rejection of transaction/ declared value of impugned goods on the basis of contemporaneous imports without providing details relating to contemporaneous imports of goods is unsustainable in law.
Facts- Vide the present appeal, the Revenue challenging the Order-in-Appeal which involved the issue of valuation of imported silk by M/s. Sree Rajendra Textiles.
M/s. Sree Rajendra Textiles have filed various Bills of Entry for clearance of Thrown Silk Yarn/ Raw Silk classifying under CTH 50040090 and 50020010.
As the Revenue noticed the contemporaneous import of the same goods of the same description were assessed at higher values and on the presumption that the importer had undervalued the goods to evade payment of appropriate duty the importer was requested to justify the values declared. Aggrieved by the same, the importer filed a writ petition before the High Court of Madras for acceptance of the contract value/ declared value. The Hon’ble High Court has ordered release of the goods subject to some conditions.
Based on the contemporaneous prices, the assessments were finalized by issuance of Orders- in-Original. Being aggrieved, the importer has filed appeals before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), who held that the under valuation was not proved with clinching evidence.
Conclusion- Held that we agree with the decision of the lower appellate authority that there was no clinching evidence for rejecting the transaction values declared. In these appeals the assessing authority has enhanced the declared values of the impugned goods on the basis of contemporaneous imports pertaining to some other importers of identical / similar goods during the relevant period. At the same time, the importer also has given the details of various Bills of Entry evidencing imports by other importers like Mahalakshmi Silk Trading, Kaveri Silk & Jute P. Ltd., at around the similar prices which were accepted and cleared by the Department. In the absence of giving all the details relating to contemporaneous imports of goods in respect of quantity, quality, type, country of origin whether of contract or not etc., which are having a bearing on the price placing reliance on only certain imports is not in accordance with the scheme of valuation envisaged under the provisions of Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT CHENNAI ORDER
All these five appeals have been filed by the Revenue challenging the Order-in-Appeal C. Cus. No. 715 to 719 dated 16.05.2013 of Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Custom House, Chennai. As all these appeals involve the same issue of valuation of imported silk by M/s. Sree Rajendra Textiles, Bangalore / Varanasi, all these are taken up together for disposal by this common order.
2. Brief facts of these appeals are that M/s. Sree Rajendra Textiles, Varanasi & Bangalore have filed various Bills of Entry for clearance of Thrown Silk Yarn/ Raw Silk classifying under CTH 50040090 and 50020010. Covering these imports, invoices were raised by M/s. Oingdao Yijia E.T.I.I./E Co., Ltd., Qingdao, China, K-Sun International Trade Co, Limited, Hongkong, M/s. Guangdong Silique International Group Gold Silk Co. Ltd., Guangzhou, China and M/s. Avanti Trading Co. Ltd., Jordan, Kowloon, Hong Kong with recorded unit price and declared country of origin as shown in the table below:
