Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
S.S. Rajan vs Collector Of Customs on 26 October, 1992
Equivalent citations: 1993(66)ELT102(TRI-DEL)
ORDER P.K. Kapoor, Member (T)
1. This is an appeal against the order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi. The appellant imported one Honda Accord (LX Model) 4 door, automatic transmission, 2000cc car fitted with airconditioner and radio cassette player. In the absence of manufacturer's invoice/price list in respect of the imported car the assessment was made on the basis of the manufacturer's invoice available in the Office of the Asstt. Collector in respect of a Honda Accord LE Four Door 2000CC Model Car by taking the assessable value as Japanese Yen 1,297,000/-. After giving a depreciation of 40% on the FOB value and adding freight, insurance and landing charges, the assessable value of the car was worked out as Rs. 1,84,427/-. The value of the airconditioner and radio cassette player fitted in the car were assessed at Rs. 13,439 and Rs. 3604 respectively. The total customs duty on the car, airconditioner and radio cassette player was worked out as Rs. 6,20,457/-. The appellant filed an appeal before the Collector of Customs (Appeals) pleading that the assessable value had not been correctly worked out by the Asstt. Collector since it had been based on the invoice price of Honda Accord EX vehicle which was effective from October 1st, 1988 whereas the imported car was Honda Accord LX and was purchased in September 1988. It was further contended that EX-Model priced higher since it had built-in airconditioner, power windows and central door locking system. The appellant also claimed that while working out the depreciation the Asstt. Collector had ignored the damage suffered by the car. The Collector (Appeals) rejected the appeal on the ground that the appellant had not been able to produce any documentary evidence to substantiate his claim in regard to the value of the imported car being less than the invoice price of Honda EX car relied upon by the department. However he allowed further depreciation of Rs.12000 on an ad hoc basis.
2. The appellant Shri S.S. Rajan appeared before us. He prayed that the additional evidence in the form of a communication received by him through the Embassy of India in Japan received by him from Honda Motor Co. Ltd. through the Embassy of India Japan certifying export price of his car No. IHMCA 5630 JC 821929 shipped from Canada on 11-7-1988 as CIF C$ 10702 may be taken on record as brought by him in application filed by him under Rule 23 of the CEGAT Procedure Rules.
3. Shri Rajan added that the communication from M/s. Honda Motor Co. Ltd. certifying export price of the particular vehicle which was purchased by him in Canada should be taken as the basis for assessment since it tallied with the price of the car shown in the invoice which was filed by him with the Customs Authorities. He prayed that his appeal for reassessment of the duty on the vehicle in question on the basis of the price declared by him i.e. CIF C $ 10,702/- may be allowed.
4. On behalf of the Revenue, the Ld. SDR Shri Ram Prakash referred to the order passed by the Collector (Appeals) and contended that in the absence of the world car catalogue for 1983 there was no case for reassessment of the value of the car imported by the appellant. He therefore pleaded for rejection of the appeal.
5. We have gone through the records of the case and the submissions made on behalf of both sides. The appellant has filed an application under Rule 23 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules praying for the additional evidence in the form of a communication from Honda Motor Co. Ltd. of Japan through Indian Embassy in Japan certifying the export price of the car which was shipped to Canada on 11-7-1988 may be taken on record. We find that the document filed by the appellant has been received through the Indian Embassy in Japan, its reliability cannot be doubted. Further we are of the view that the contents of the document would assist us in deciding the case. We therefore allow the miscellaneous application and admit the additional evidence filed by the appellants.
6. It is seen that the relevant world car catalogue for 1988 which is normally relied upon by the department for determining the assessable value of cars imported by individuals was not available with the department. The department had therefore determined the assessable value of Honda LX car on the basis of the invoice price of Honda Accord LE vehicle imported by some other passenger. The appellant has contended that the price of Honda Accord LX cars has to be much lower than the price of Honda Accord EX model since the facilities like central door locking system, built-in airconditioner, power windows are incorporated in Honda Accord EX vehicles. He has also contended that the export price of vehicle as certified by the manufacturer may be accepted as the correct export price of the vehicle for computing its correct assessable value and the duty leviable thereon.
7. We find that the communication price addressed by Honda Motor Co. Japan to the Embassy of India in Japan reads as follows :
"With reference to your inquiry over the phone regarding Accord, we will inform you as follows :-
Shipment toward Canada on 11-7-1988 FOB C $ 10,397 GIF 10,702 Frame No. JHMCA 5630JC821929"
8. It is seen that the Chassis/Frame No of the vehicle indicated in the communication from the Honda Motor Co. Ltd. tallies with the chassis number of the vehicle indicated in the bill of entry filed by the appellant. In these circumstances we are of the view that the export price of C $10397 FOB as certified by the manufacturer can be adopted as the basis for computing the assessable value of the car imported by the appellant. For these reasons and having regard to the fact that the invoice relied upon by the department for computing the assessable value was in respect of a Honda Accord EX Car which is superior to the imported Honda Accord LX vehicle we set aside the order passed by the Collector (Appeals) and direct that the assessable value of the vehicle in question should be worked out by the Asstt. Collector on the basis of the price certified by the Honda Motor Co. in their communication addressed to the Indian Embassy in Japan and consequential refund if any should also be granted to the appellant.