Viraj Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (I) (CESTAT Mumbai)
It is settled principle of the commercial transactions that the prices of the transacted goods can be determined only on the date of transaction and not on any other date whether previous or subsequent. The prices may fluctuate on account of the vagaries of market but the contractual price agreed upon by the contracting parties would be sacrosanct unless the contract provides so. The contractual price entered between the parties need to be tested against the prevailing market prices on the date of contract rather than any subsequent price. The Appellant’s contract was entered into on 19-1-2012 and the goods were shipped in March 2012. The contract price was US $ 713 per M.Ton. The appraisal price given in Metal Bulletin dated 30.01.2012 for production and exports of March 2012 of Chinese Mills, was in the range of US $ 685-695. Thus the Appellant’s price was even higher than the appraisal price given in the Metal Bulletin of January 2012 for production and export of March 2012. The London Metal Bulletin prices of subsequent date 26.03.2012 giving the appraisal price for production and exports of May 2012 to be in the range of US $ 715 to 730 per MT, cannot form the basis of enhancing the value and for rejecting the transaction price.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT MUMBAI ORDER
These appeals are directed against order in appeal No 336,337/MCH/AC/Gr IV/2013 dated 03.06.2013 of Commissioner Customs (Appeals), Mumbai Zone-I. By the impugned order Commissioner has held as follows:
“ORDER
8. In view of the above discussions and findings, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. The said appeals are dismissed as above.”
2.1 Appellant had imported Cold Rolled Steel Sheets in Coils (CRCA) from M/S Hangzhou Cogeneration (Hong Kong) Company Ltd., Hong Kong, at unit Price of US$ 713 PMT and filed Bills of Entry with the following details for clearance through Customs.
