Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Indian Farmers Fertilizer v. Commissioner Of Customs

Indian Farmers Fertilizer v. Commissioner Of Customs

(Customs, Excise And Gold (control) Appellate Tribunal New Delhi)

Final Order No. 435/2002-A In Appeal No. C/333/2002-A | 23-08-2002

K.K. Usha, President

1. The only issue arising in this appeal at the instance of the assessee is whether the appellants are entitled to refund of an amount of Rs. 2,04,000/- on the ground that while arriving at the assessable value of the goods the assessing authority had incorrectly not allowed US $ 10,395.40 worth of discount. The assessing authority rejected the claim holding that though in the invoice the nature of the discount had not been described, in the quotation dated 7-8-97 of M/s. Lab. India, the Indian agent of the supplier, the discount has been shown as special discount and therefore, it is liable to be added in the assessable value. The above order was affirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) by order dated 27-2-2002. Aggrieved by the above orders the importer-assessee which is a cooperative society has come up in appeal. The only question to be considered is whether the discount was in the nature of a special discount or was it available to all purchasers from the foreign seller, namely, M/s. Perkin-Elmer International, Inc. Switzerland. Admittedly, in the invoice the discount is not described as special discount. Merely because, in the quotation, there is a reference to special discount it cannot be taken that the discount actually given was one not available to all buyers. A certificate issued by M/s. Perkin-Elmer International, Inc., Switzerland dated 22-7-98 would show that they allow 25% to 30% trade discount to all their customers and their invoice dated 3-3-98 raised on the appellant herein considering 25% trade discount on total US $ 23,374.00 and 20% trade discount on total US $ 15,173.00. In the light of the above certificate, it is contended on behalf of the appellant that the authorities should not have proceeded to conclude that the discount is special discount merely on the basis of a reference in the quotation given by the Indian agent of the foreign supplier.

2. We find merit in the above contention raised by the appellant. The veracity of the certificate issued by the supplier is not challenged before us. If that be so, the certificate along with the invoice would show that the discount was in general nature and not something applicable specially to the appellant. If that be so, it is not liable to be added to the assessable value. The impugned order is set aside and the appeal stands allowed.

Advocate List
  • For Petitioner : P.C. Jain, Adv.
  • For Respondent : P.K. Jain, SDR
Bench
  • K.K. USHA, PRESIDENT
  • C.N.B. NAIR, MEMBER
Eq Citations
  • 2003 (151) ELT 221 (TRI. - Delhi)
  • LQ/CEGAT/2002/1687
Head Note

CBI — Appeals — Appeal — Allowing — When done Customs — Valuation — Discount — Invoice — Nature of discount — Determination of — Merely because, in the quotation, there is a reference to special discount it cannot be taken that the discount actually given was one not available to all buyers — Veracity of certificate issued by supplier not challenged before Supreme Court — If that be so, the certificate along with the invoice would show that the discount was in general nature and not something applicable specially to the appellant — Therefore, it is not liable to be added to the assessable value — Customs Act, 1962, S. 14