KIRAT INTERNATIONAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ISSUE notice. Sh. B.V. Niren, CGSC accepts notice on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sh. Rahul Kaushik, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of Respondent No.3.

(2.) THE petitioner imported fitness equipment from three different places, i.e. China, Korea and the United States of America (US). Upon being issued with Show Cause Notices alleging under -invoicing under various provisions of law, the petitioner approached the Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission (hereafter referred to as "the Commission") with an application under Section 127B of the Customs Act. The Commission took -up the matter for consideration and subsequently heard all the parties fully. By the order dated 31.10.2013, the Commission held that the proposal of the respondent ­ Customs authorities and the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) that freight and insurance should be worked out at 20% and 0.125% of the declared FOB value but the actual cost of freight and insurance known to the parties should be taken into account. The relevant directions of the Commission in this regard is as follows:

(3.) THE final order, therefore, was that in respect of the consignments from China and Korea, freight and insurance were to be calculated on actual basis whereas in respect of consignments in question from the US, the value was to be assessed at what had been proposed by the Department. This, argues the petitioner, not only betrays non -application of mind but is a blatantly erroneous approach.