Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Tamil Nadu
S.G.P.C. Metal Industries vs Cc on 6 February, 1998
Equivalent citations: 1998(76)ECR474(TRI.-CHENNAI)
ORDER
U.L. Bhat, J. (President)
1. Appellant is absent in spite of notice of hearing, but has sent a request for decision of the appeal on merits. We have heard Shri M. Ali, JDR and perused the papers.
2. The appellant who imported goods from abroad, presented the Bill of Entry on 16.7.1985 and paid duty on 8.8.1985. Exchange rate of £ 6.1865 = Rs. 100/-was adopted to quantify the duty. Show cause notice dated 27.1.1986 was issued stating that exchange rate of £ 5.9825 = Rs. 100/- should have been adopted and therefore, there was short payment of duty. The notice proposed demand of differential duty. The demand was opposed on merits as well as on the ground of limitation. The Assistant Collector confirmed the demand. The Collector (Appeals) having confirmed the order of the Assistant Collector, the importers filed the present appeal.
3. There is no dispute that the exchange rate prevailing on the date of presentation of Bill of Entry would be the exchange rate to be adopted in quantifying the duty. The exchange rate prevailing on 1.7.1985 was 6.1865 = Rs. 100/-. The exchange rate was £ 5.9825 = Rs. 100/- w.e.f. 15.7.1985. The Bill of Entry was presented on 16.7.1985. Duty was quantified taking into consideration the exchange rate prevailing w.e.f. 1.7.1985 and omitting to notice the change in the exchange rate w.e.f. 15.7.1985. Thus it was a case of erroneous quantification of duty and the demand was justified.
4. The contention that the show cause notice was barred by time has no force since it was received by the importer within six months from the date of payment of duty.
5. We find no ground to interfere and accordingly dismiss the appeal.
Dictated and pronounced in the open court.