IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.M. Sahai and S.C. Sen, JJ.
COMMERCE INTERNATIONAL
Versus
COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS
Civil Appeal No. 2198 of 1988, decided on 29-3-1995
Valuation (Customs) - Goods purchased by importer from
foreign trading company - Value declared in the seller’s invoice not accepted
since seller was not the manufacturer of goods - Department requiring the
importer to furnish manufacturer’s price list since the seller itself was not a
manufacturer - Foreign seller not willing to reveal the source of supply -
Manufacturer’s price list obtained by department - Declared value of goods when
compared with manufacturer’s price list found to be much below the normal price
in the international market - Goods liable to confiscation having been under
valued - Valuation of goods under Rule 3(b) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1963
on the basis of manufacturer’s price list valid when seller refuses to divulge
the name of the manufacturer - Value determinable under Rule 3(b) if it cannot
be determined under Rule 3(a) ibid - Secton 14 of the Customs Act, 1962.
[paras 2, 3]
[Order]. - The only question that arises for consideration in this
appeal is whether the Tribunal was justified in applying Rule 3(b) of the
Customs Valuation Rules framed under Section 14 of the Customs Act.
2.The appellant filed a Bill of Entry for
clearance of 125 cartons of toners declaring the value of the goods
at a particular amount on the basis of invoice-cum-value and country of origin
certificate issued by M/s. Sangill Ltd. Since the seller was not a manufacturer
the Department required the appellant to furnish the price list of the goods
under import but the appellant instead of filing the price list stated that they
had purchased the goods from a trading company which was not willing to reveal
the source of supply. Consequently, the Department obtained export price list
from M/s. Coates Electrographics Limited. After examining the price list of M/s.
Coates Electrographics Ltd., the Collector was of the opinion that it was a case
in which Rule 3(a) could not be applied. Therefore, he proceeded to determine
the value under Rule 3(b) and on the price list supplied by the manufacturer the
valuation of the toner imported by the appellant was determined. It was held
that the value of the goods when compared with manufacturer’s price list was
much below the normal price in the international market. The goods were directed
to be confiscated with an option to clear on Rs. 8 lakhs. Penalty of Rs. 1000/-
was also imposed. Against this order the appellant approached the Tribunal. The
Tribunal found that the Collector did not commit any error in applying Rule 3(b)
but reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 8 lakhs to Rs. 5 lakhs. The penalty of
Rs. 1,000/- was maintained.
3.Section 14(1)(b) of the Customs Act empowers
the appropriate authority to determine the value of the
imported goods in accordance with provisions contained in Rules 3 to 8. Rule
3(a) provides for determination of value of such goods, with comparable goods
produced or manufactured and ordinarily sold or offered for sale to other buyers
in India under competitive conditions. Rule 3(b) permits the proper officer to
determine valuation on the export price at which such goods or comparable goods
are ordinarily sold or offered for sale under competitive conditions to buyers
outside India. The determination under Rule 3(b) could be undertaken if the
valuation could not be determined under clause (a). The authorities found that
in the nature of goods imported by the apellant the valuation of it could not be
determined under rule 3(a). Therefore, Rule 3(b) was rightly invoked. And the
determination having been done on comparable goods offered for sale in
competitive conditions in countries outside India the order does not suffer from
any error of law. The Tribunal further did not commit any error in relying on
the price list supplied by the manufacturer as compared to trading company which
refused to divulge the name of the manufacturer.
4.In the result, this appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed. But there shall be no order as to
costs.
_______