Sheth Ship Breaking Corpn. Vs. Commissioner of Customs - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....stated in the m.o.a. dt.08-06-99 was the price paid/payable at the time of importation and should be considered for arriving at the assessable value under section 14 of the customs act. he relied on the decision of the tribunal in the case of commissioner v. guru ashish ship breakers reported in 2003 (157 elt 277). he rejected the appellant's contention that the reduction in price mutually agreed upon between the buyer and the seller is justifiable. he held that since such a reduction in price was made after the vessel was imported the original price paid/payable when the vessel was imported should only be considered for assessment.2. we heard ld. d.r. and perused the records. none appeared for the appellants.3. the commissioner's decision is based on the tribunal's order cited supra. the appellants failed to make a prima facie case in their favour the application for pre-deposit of duty and stay of operation of the order of the commissioner is rejected. the applicants are directed to deposit the entire duty demanded within 8 weeks of the date of this order. failure to do so will result in the dismissal of the appeal without further notice.

Judgment:

1. The application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 3,34,656/-and stay of operation arose out of the order of commissioner (Appeals), Ahmedabad. In the impugned order the commissioner held that the price stated in the M.O.A. dt.08-06-99 was the price paid/payable at the time of importation and should be considered for arriving at the assessable value under Section 14 of the customs act. He relied on the decision of the tribunal in the case of commissioner v. Guru Ashish Ship Breakers reported in 2003 (157 ELT 277). He rejected the appellant's contention that the reduction in price mutually agreed upon between the buyer and the seller is justifiable. He held that since such a reduction in price was made after the vessel was imported the original price paid/payable when the vessel was imported should only be considered for assessment.

2. We heard ld. D.R. and perused the records. None appeared for the appellants.

3. The Commissioner's decision is based on the tribunal's order cited supra. The Appellants failed to make a prima facie case in their favour The application for pre-deposit of duty and stay of operation of the order of the commissioner is rejected. The applicants are directed to deposit the entire duty demanded within 8 weeks of the date of this order. Failure to do so will result in the dismissal of the appeal without further notice.