S.P. MEHTA Vs. CC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue involved in the present appeal filed by Shri S.P. Mehta is the valuation of the car imported by him.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that Shri Mehta imported a Nissan Sunny car 1990 in 1996. According to purchase order dated 11.6.1990, issued by Nissan U.K. Ltd., the price of car was 6561 FOB. The Assistant Commissioner assessed the car to duty by taking price as 8599 based on Parker's Car Price Guide and allowed a discount of 15%. He further allowed a depreciation of 58% on the discounted price and after adding freight and insurance, the assessable value arrived at was Rs. 1,95,852/ -. The Assistant Commissioner's findings are that the purchase order is not the invoice from the manufacturer; the discount of 175 has been extended without indicating the basis thereof; the invoice does not show the price at which car is ordinarily sold in the course of international trade and, therefore, the assessable value was determined on the basis of value given in Parker's Car Price Guide 1996 in respect of the car of the year 1990. He relied upon the decision in Pram Kumar v. CCE . An amount of Rs. 23,646/ - as freight was added which was calculated from the country of origin as per decision in Ravi Gupta v. Commissioner of Customs 1992 (57) ELT (T) : 1992 (38) ECR 55 (T). On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the declared price of the car as the Parker's Car Price Guide did not include the exact same model of the car. He, however, disallowed the special discount of 175 holding the no special discount, in any form whatsoever, is to be allowed. He directed the Assistant Commissioner to add freight, insurance and cost of car stereo as per norms in the declared price and refund the excess duty collected from the Appellant.

(3.) SHRI G.S. Chaman, learned advocate, submitted that the declared price in U.K. includes freight, insurance and landing/handling charges and as such the car price in U.K. cannot be taken as FOB Price in Japan; that the small stereo was fitted as part and parcel of the car and car invoice price was inclusive of its price. He relied upon the decision in Collector of Customs v. Kumaran Krishna Kutty in which it was held that freight from the country of origin is to be added in the assessable value. He also placed reliance on the decision in the case of Inderjit Singh Bawa v. Collector of Customs, Bombay wherein it was held that there is no need to go to the catalogue price or any other price or an imported car price book to ascertain the value when a document produced by the importer himself is available and this document represents the true amount paid by him. He, further, submitted that instead of 58% depreciation, he was eligible for 66% depreciation as it is to be worked out upto the date of Bill of Entry and not upto the date on which car was given for transportation to India (5.2.1996); that depreciation has to be worked out on the basis of the age of the vehicle on the date of its Import into India. Reliance is placed on the decision in Dr. Subhas Chandra Reddy v. Collector of Customs in which it was held that "In the absence of specific provision and details of Customs House Practice with reference to allowance of depreciation, we hold that irrespective of the fact whether it was used or otherwise the appellant is entitled to get such permissible depreciation from the date of purchase till it is landed in India to determine the value of old car on the date of importation." He finally submitted that 175 discount is to be deducted from the price as per clarificatory Note below Rule 4 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules; that the price actually paid is the total payment made by the buyer to the seller for the imported goods; that diplomatic concession is to be deducted from the price. He relied upon the decision in Dr. A. Algappan v. Collector of Customs .