S.P. Bharucha, R.C. Lahoti and N. Santosh Hegde, JJ.

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, KANDLA

Versus

EAST AFRICAN TRADERS

Civil Appeal No. 2511 of 1992, decided on 2-12-199⁹

Valuation (Customs) - “Related person” - Customs authorities and Tribunal can pierce the veil of the Respondent Company to determine whether or not the buyer and the seller were ‘related person^s within the scope of Rule 2(2) of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988 - Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962.

[1998 (99) E.L.T. 202 (S.C.) followed]. [para 1]

CASE CITED

Calcutta Chromotype Ltd. v. Collector — 1998 (99) E.L.T. 202 (S.C.)

— Relied on______[Para 1]

[Order]. - The learned Attorney General, appearing for the appellant, has restricted his argument to the observations of the Tribunal in the order under appeal relating to the piercing of the veil of the respondent company to determine whether or not the buyer and the seller were related persons, this being governed by Rule 2, sub-rule (2) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The law that would apply is that laid down in the judgment of this Court in Calcutta Chromotype Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta [1998 (99) E.L.T. 202 (S.C.) = 1998 (3) SCC 681]. It is permissible for the authorities and the Tribunal to pierce the veil in given facts and circumstances to ascertain whether the buyer and the seller are indeed related persons within the meaning of the said sub-rule.

2.The civil appeal is, therefore, disposed of.

3.No order as to costs.

______

Top