CC Vs. MRS. T.C. SHARMILA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revenue is aggrieved with the Order -in -Appeal passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Chennai passed in C.Cus. 1280/98 dated 21.12.98. The respondent -imported had imported "Toshiba Model DT - KEL High Power R/F system". The importer had claimed benefit of Sl. No. 158 of Customs Notfn. 11/97 which reads "medical equipment certified in list 14" and claimed C(1) of the list as "High Power X -Ray unit more than 50 K.W. with special attachment for Pediatric patients, image intensifiers TV system and cut film camera". The respondent had produced manufacturer's quotation/proforma invoice catalogue and all the details to say that the item is eligible for the benefit of the said description in the notification. However, the original authority denied the benefit and has also enhanced the value of the goods on the basis of an invoice which was dated 6 1/2 months prior to the invoice produced by the importer. Ld. Commissioner in the impugned order after examining the goods and also certificate issued by the Professor of Neuroradiology, Madras Medical College accepted the plea that the item is meant for paediatric use and held the same to be eligible for the benefit of notification in question.

(2.) As regards the valuation matter is concerned, he noted that the import was not contemporaneous and the invoice was seven months old. He has noted that technology keep changing and the value of the goods keep going down. He has also relied on the judgment rendered by the Tribunal in the case of CC Madras Vs. Overseas Trading Corporation Pvt. Ltd, 1998 (102) ELT 453 wherein it has been held that the department cannot rely on an invoice which is more than seven months earlier to the importation in question as change of price is likely during the period in question. Hence the invoice was accepted by rejecting the revenue's appeal.

(3.) We have heard Ld. DR Shri A. Jayachandran for the appellant and Shri R. Ganesan, learned Advocate for the respondent -importer.