| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 723 2010 SLD 723 2010 PTD 2432 |
Customs Appeals Nos.K-288 to K-292 of 2009, decision dated:2-07-2010
MUHAMMAD ARIL MORON, JUDICIAL (MEMBER-II)
Nadeem Ahmed Mirza, Constultant for Appellant.Shahid Dasti, Appraising Officer for
Respondent.
Law:
Section: 25
(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----Ss. 25, 79, 80 & 194-A---Customs Rules, 2001, Rr.107(a), 109, 433 & 438---Determination of customs value of goods---Reassessment of---Importers, imported a consignment and upon arrival of vessel, importers transmitted bill of entry or goods declaration under S.79(1) of the Customs Act, 1969 and R.433 of Customs Rules, 2001 to the Collectorate and paid upfront duty---Appraiser concerned instead of allowing clearance of the consignments on declared value asked importers to deposit additional amount of duty and taxes while reassessing value of imported goods---Importers challenged reassessment before authorities below but their representations were rejected and Assistant Collector issued impugned assessment order---Appeal filed by the importers had been dismissed by the Collector Customs---Validity---First issue involved in the case was, "whether importers' declared value was transaction value within the meaning of S.25(1) of Customs Act, 1969; and that importers had discharged the burden of proof laid down under R.109 of Customs Rules, 2001 "---When importers in the Column of (Financial information) of CD had transmitted clearly that the import was against confirmed letter of credit, its number and date, importers had discharged burden laid upon them under S.25(1) of the Customs Act, 1969 and under R.109 of Customs Rules, 2001---For disputing the said value, it was mandated upon the authorities to transmit the message under sub-rule (2) of R.109 of Customs Rules, 2001 to the importers for transmitting/ scanning additional documents, but no such exercise was undertaken, either by the Appraiser, Principal Appraiser and Assistant Collector of Customs---Department had failed to discharge the onus of establishing that price declared by the importers was not the transaction value within the meaning of S.25(1) of the Customs Act, 1969---Said issue was answered in affirmative. Kamran Industry v. Collector of Customs, Exports PLD 1986 Kar. 68; Punjab Beverages (Pvt.) Ltd. v. CEST and 2 others 2002 PTD 2957; Messrs Collector of Customs, Port Muhammad…