ORDER
M. Gouri Shankar Murthy, Member (J)
1 The sole question that arises for consideration in this Revision Application to the Government of India, transferred to the Tribunal and heard as if it were an appeal, pursuant to S. 131-B (2) of the Customs Act, 1962 (the Act, short) is as to whether overtime allowances paid to the Customs staff and recovered from the importer should form part of the assessable value in terms of S. 14 of the Act.
2. The material facts in a brief compass are-
(a) a quantity of 11000 M.T. of fertilizers were imported into the port of Mangalore on or about 30-3-1978;
(b) a Bill of Entry was filed on 1-1-1978 and a sum of Rs. 30,88,978.81 remitted towards customs duty on a reckoning in which the assessable value included the F.O.B value, freight charges, stevedoring charges and landing dues on that very day;
(c) on 21-8-1978 the Superintendent, Customs, Mangalore, issued a notice requiring the appellant (acting on behalf of the importer) to show cause to the Assistant Collector against inclusion in the assessable value the overtime charges paid to the officers of Customs and, in consequence, payment of Rs. 1,037.71 towards duty short paid;
(d) it was held on adjudication by the Assistant Collector and in appeal by the Appellate Collector that since all expenses incurred before the goods are unloaded like e.g. stevedoring charges, Port Commissioner’s crane are to be included in the assessable value, O.T. charges paid to Customs officers should also form part of the assessable value;
(e) the instant Revision now heard as an appeal was sequel.
3. On a perusal of the papers, hearing the counsel for both the parties and otherwise, it would appear that-
(a) expenditure incurred towards O.T. charges that were paid to the Customs officers and staff, even if reimbursible by the appellant, are not obligatory but optional, casual and fortuitous rather than inevitable, immutable and ordinarily of daily occurrence;
(b) in the nature of things, such expenditure is not coequal to or on a par with stevedoring or port trust expenses which are invariably incurred; and
(c) in the premises, such expenditure cannot form part of the assessable value in terms of S. I4(a) of the Act, defined to be “the price at which such or like goods are ordinarily sold”. If the expenditure is not ordinarily incurred, obviously, it cannot form part of the price at which such or like goods are “ordinarily” sold.
4. In the result, the Revision heard as an appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any.