M/S Eicher Tractors Ltd., Haryana vs Commissioner Of Customs, Mumbai on 14 November, 2000
6. Under Rule 4, which relates to transaction value of the imported goods it can be accepted provided such transaction value shall be the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to India and adjusted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 9 of these rules. Sub-rule 2 of Rule 4, which is relevant for our purposes, provides that the transaction value of imported goods under Sub-rule (1) shall be accepted if the parameters enumerated therein are satisfied. Nowhere in the show cause notice it has been mentioned that any of the requirements of Clauses (a) to (h) of Sub-rule (2) of Rule 4 were not satisfied so as to enable the concerned authorities to reject the transaction value. Therefore, prima facie, no valid reason for not accepting the transaction value which was required to be accepted under Rule 4(2). As held by the Supreme Court in Eicher Tractors Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai reported in 2000 (122) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.), reading Rule 3 (i) and Rule 4 (1) together, it was clear that the mandate has been cast on the authorities to accept the price actually paid or payable in respect of the goods under assessment as the transaction value subject to certain excep-tions specified in Rule 4(2). These exceptions are in expansion and explicatory of the special circumstances in Section 14(1). It follows that unless the price actually paid for the particular transaction falls within the exceptions, the Customs authorities are bound to assess the duty on the transaction value.