CC Vs. MOTOR INDUSTRIES CO.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revenue is aggrieved by Order -in -Appeal No. C. Cus. No. 542/2001 dated 31.8.2001 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) held in the finding portion as follows:

(2.) Revenue contends in this appeal that in the case of second -hand machine, the sale price is always subject to certain conditions/considerations because of its usage, upkeep, maintenance, thereby no comparison whatsoever is possible with other second -hand machines not only under (Rule 4) but also other Rules 5, 6, 7, 7A because a very old second machine may fetch a better price, due to proper maintenance, upkeep and used sparingly, rather than second -hand machine not that much old which will not get better price because of Its bad maintenance, improper upkeep frequently/regularly used. It is stated that the recourse had to be made to Rule 8 read with Rule 10A for determination of value for assessement purposes, They summed up the ground by stating that depreciation method that has been followed as per the age old practice of customs, based on the procedure set out by Govt, in SO 49/87, 6/88, 20/88 and 80/94 etc. (determination of value under the Rule 8) which has also a legal sanction in the light of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Gajra Bevel Gears and the same is not in conflict with the other rulings of the Apex Court rendered In the case of Eicher Tractors .

(3.) We have heard Ld. SDR and Shrl S. S. Radhakrlshnan, Ld. Counsel for the respondent.