Case Details: Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai Versus Novateur Electrical Digital Systems Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 27 Centax 204 (S.C.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- J.B. Pardiwala & R. Mahadevan, JJ.
- S/Shri H.R. Rao, Udit Dedhiya, Yashraj Singh Bundela, Mrs B. Sunita Rao, Advs. & G.S. Makkar, AOR, for the Appellant.
- S/Shri Prakash Shah, Sr. Adv., Ms Charanya Lakshmikumaran, Ms Neha Choudhary, Ms Umang Motiyani, Ms Falguni Gupta, Ayush Agarwal, Jas Sanghavi, Prabhat Chaurasia, Advs., M.P. Devanath & Jasdeep Singh Dhillon, AOR’s, for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The assessee imported Plugs, Sockets, and Molded Case Circuit Breakers (MCCBs) in bulk packaging. The Customs authorities assessed the imports based on the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) valuation method for levying Countervailing Duty (CVD) under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The assessee contested this assessment, asserting that the goods were not intended for retail sale and that packaging was done solely for ease of transportation. The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) ruled in favour of the assessee, holding that MRP-based valuation was inapplicable and that CVD should be assessed on transaction value under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved by this decision, the Revenue filed an appeal before the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Held
The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that, in view of the Revenue’s averment that the tax effect in the present matter was below the threshold prescribed in the Government of India’s litigation policy, the appeal was liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed, and all pending applications were disposed of.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Legrand (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2014 (304) E.L.T. 305 (Tri. – Mumbai) — Affirmed
List of Departmental Clarification Cited
- C.B.I. & C. (Judicial Cell) Instruction F. No. 390/Misc./30/2023-JC, dated 2-11-2023 [Para 3]
