Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Indian Airlines vs Commr. Of Customs (Appeals) on 6 September, 2002
Equivalent citations: 2003(161)ELT217(TRI-MUMBAI)
JUDGMENT J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)
1. This is an appeal against rejection of refund claim filed on the ground that the supplier had revised the price of the goods.
2. The importer had cited an invoice dated 8-2-89 showing the value of USD 6900, to substantiate the price declared in the bill of entry filed on 16-2-89. The goods were cleared on payment of duty. In the refund application, the claim was made that the correct price was HFL 6430. The duty excess paid of Rs. 1,75,168 was sought to be refunded.
3. We have seen two signals from the suppliers, dated Jan. 1989 and 14-2-89 confirming the price in HFL and offering a credit note to be issued by the supplier for the excess value charged. The credit note is not available for perusal. The claim was lodged in August 1989.
4. Section 149 of the Customs Act permits amendment of the bills of entry where the documentary evidence was in existence at the time of clearance of the goods. The correspondence of the record does not fit the time frame. The actual remittance made to the suppliers is not produced to substantiate the claim of lesser value having been charged.
5. In the absence of the satisfactory documentary evidence, the authorities were correct in dismissing the appeal filed under Section 149 of the Customs Act and also the consequential benefits. The appeal does not sustain and is dismissed.