VINTEL DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD. V. COMMISSIONER  2003 (153) E.L.T. A101 (S.C.)

 

Valuation (Customs) — Whether in absence of evidence of contemporaneous nature of goods, claim that price was as negotiated price, quantity imported five times more than imports of other assessee, whose products are different, acceptable ?

 

The Supreme Court Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri and Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.N. Variava on 1-4-2002 after condoning the delay admitted the Civil Appeal No. D4008 of 2002 filed by Vintel Distributors (P) Ltd. against CEGAT Order No. 1449/2001, dated 21-8-2001 and reported in 2002 (149) E.L.T. 145 (Tribunal) (Vintel Distributors Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner). While admitting appeal, the Supreme Court passed the following order :-

 

“Delay is condoned.

Appeal is dismissed.”

 

The Appellate Tribunal in its impugned order had held that in case of contemporaneous imports, for similarity of goods, goods should be identical and not just similar, corresponding in nature identically in terms of quality, quantity, place of origin and time of origin should be considered. In absence of such evidence of contemporaneous nature of goods of another assessee, claim of appellant that their price was a negotiated price quantity imported five times more than the imports of other assessee, whose products are different, acceptable.

[Vintel Distributors Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner - 2003 (153) E.L.T. A101 (S.C.)]