COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT), MUMBAI Vs. BUYING OVERSEAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVENUE is in appeal against Order -in -Appeal No. 319 (Gr. IIA)/2009(JNCH), dated 15 -6 -2009 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai, wherein he has set aside the order of the adjudicating authority enhancing the value of the imported goods, namely, "Toners" from US $ 4.25 per Kg. to US $ 6.80 per Kg. In the appeal memorandum, it has been urged that the findings of the lower appellate authority is that the goods under import were part of a bulk order of 100 MT and therefore, the value declared cannot be assailed by comparing the import price of smaller quantity of imports of the order of 1 MT or below is not correct as the difference of 37.5% observed in the above transaction is too high and cannot be explained by the difference in the quantity of imports alone and therefore, it has been urged that while some discount for higher quantum of imports can be considered, the [difference] of 37.5% involved in the present imports is not sustainable in law.

(2.) THE learned Deputy Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue reiterates the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum. The learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the order passed by the lower appellate authority is fair and reasonable and cannot be assailed without any evidence. While the Revenue concedes that there can be discount on account of higher quantum of imports, no evidence has been led by the Revenue to substantiate that the discount of 37.5% in the price noticed in the present import is unreasonable or is not in accordance with the trade practice. Even Rule 5 of the Customs Valuation Rules, which allows adoption of value of contemporaneous imports provides for adjustments in the scale of imports. Therefore, even as per the CVR, adjustments have to be made taking into quantum of imports in the particular transaction. Therefore, the order passed by the lower appellate authority taking note of these facts is clearly sustainable in law and accordingly he pleads for dismissing the appeal of the Revenue. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides.