The Bangalore bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that in the case of bulk liquid cargo, the quantity received in the shore tank be considered for determination of assessable value and not the value shown in the Bill of Entry.
Chemplast Sanmar Ltd, the appellant assessee filed an Ex-bond Bill of Entry for clearance of 1575 MTs and 1570 MTs of Methanol, respectively imported from Southern Unicorn and Sun Great and initially the Bills of Entry were provisionally assessed pending verification of the documents and the assessments were later finalized on the basis of the documents submitted by taking note of the quantity as shown in the imported document and not the actual quantity received in the Shore Tanks.
The assessee appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) to confirm the Customs duty demand against the assessee.
Radhika Shriranjini, the counsel for the assessee contended that Circular No.34/2016 had been issued clarifying that in the case of bulk liquid cargo, the quantity received in the shore tank be considered for determination of assessable value and not the value shown in the import invoice.
K. A. Jathin, the counsel for the department relied on the decisions made by the lower authorities and contended that the assessee was liable to pay the differential duty demand raised by the department.
The Bench observed that in the case of Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. vs. CC, the court held that the actual quantity received in the Shore Tank after import, be the basis for the determination of value as well as duty.
The two-member bench comprising D M Misra (Judicial) and Bhagya Devi (Technical) quashed the Customs duty demand against the assessee while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
