VARSHA PLASTICS PVT. LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal at the instance of the importer challenging the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 24 -4 -2003. The issue arising in this appeal is whether the Revenue was justified in rejecting the transaction value declared by the assessee.

(2.) THE goods imported by the appellant was subjected to first check examination and representative samples sealed and forwarded to Customs Laboratory, Kandla. According to examination report and test report dated 4 -8 -2000, the goods were found as heterogeneous mixture of colourless/transparent and a little of coloured granules together with small film cuttings. It is composed predominantly of polypropylene together with polyethylene having specific gravity of less than 0.94 and more than 0.94. The report was to the effect that they can be considered as mixed granules floor sweepings. The Customs Authorities found that there is no standard definition available for the term "floor sweeping" and that there was no contemporaneous import of floor sweeping on the basis of which the transaction value declared could be rejected. The transaction value declared was @ US 225 per M.T. C and F. The assessing authority placing reliance on the value of prime quality goods reported in an international journal namely Platt's Weekly Bulletin fixed the assessable value as US 423 per M.T. The lowest price quoted in Platt for prime quality goods was US 705 per M.T. during the relevant period. After giving 40% discount thereon, the value was worked out to US 423 per M.T. The above finding of the original authority was affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals).

(3.) IT is contended before us on behalf of the appellant that there was no reason to reject the transaction value declared by the appellant. It is also contended that no reliance could have been placed on the price of prime quality goods for the purpose of assessing the value of floor sweeping. Ld. Counsel for the appellant further submitted that this Tribunal had occasion to consider the question whether the price quoted in 'Plaits' report can be based for fixing the transaction value in the case of Adani Exports Ltd. reported in 2000 (116) E.L.T. 715. In the above decision the Tribunal came to the conclusion that London Metal Exchange where actual trading of metals take place i.e. transactions are involved and which are reflected in its LME Bulletin, the Platt's price report is not based on transaction but merely is a compilation of price ranges of various plastic materials. It is also observed that these reports are region -wise and not country -wise. They cannot represent alternate transaction values. In that case transaction value, on the basis of such platt's report, was rejected by the Tribunal. The appeal filed from the above decision was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2002 (146) E.L.T. A213.