COLLECTOR V. U.S. MAGNETS (P) LTD 2003 (154) E.L.T. A237 (S.C.)

 

Import — Lining material — 100% polyestered material of 58” to (1) Valuation (Customs) — 60” width being lining material, import valid (2) Parameters for assessment

 

The Supreme Court Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.N. Kirpal and Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Rajendra Babu on 19-4-1999 dismissed the Civil Appeal No. 526 of 1998 filed by Collector of Customs, Bombay against the CEGAT Order No. 780/95-A, dated 23-11-1995 and reported in 2002 (146) E.L.T. 329 (Tri. - Del.) [U.S. Magnets (P) Ltd. v. Collector] While dismissing the appeal, the Supreme Court passed the following order :

 

“This appeal is dismissed in view of the Judgment of this Court in Collector of Customs, Bombay v. East Punjab Trader and Others [1998 (9) SCC 115].

 

The Appellate Tribunal in its impugned order, following its decision in the case of East Punjab Traders v. Collector - 1988 (34) E.L.T. 98 (Tribunal), had held that the finding of the Additional Collector of Customs, New Custom House, Bombay, that the material imported by the appellants is not a lining material is not sustainable.

 

The Appellate Tribunal further held that admittedly the Additional Collector himself has recognised the clear difference in the quality of the goods imported.  They were definitely of inferior quality compared with the quality of the goods of the earlier import.  As has been rightly contended by the appellants the basis for adjustment of 25% has not at all been disclosed to the appellants.  The valuation has to be done on a firm basis and when the Additional Collector has admitted that there was no contemporaneous import for comparison, it was obligatory on his part to spell out the basis of which he is adopting the price of the earlier import and give the basis for the 25% adjustment given.

[Collector v. U.S. Magnets (P) Ltd. - 2003 (154) E.L.T. A237 (S.C.)]