Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the invoice value declared for the imported used vehicle was liable to be rejected and the goods confiscated with consequential fine and penalty.
Analysis: The declared invoice, bill of lading and supporting particulars were examined and found to be consistent with the identity and description of the vehicle. The authority below had already accepted the invoice value on the basis that the relevant valuation parameters were disclosed and that no sufficient ground existed to discard the declared price. The Tribunal found no infirmity in that appreciation of the evidence. The revenue's objection that the invoice was fabricated or that the importer had earlier accepted the departmental valuation was not accepted, since the record showed that the valuation was in fact challenged. In these circumstances, the basis for rejecting the invoice value and interfering with the reduced redemption fine and penalty was absent.
Conclusion: The invoice value was rightly accepted and the revenue's challenge to the valuation and consequential relief failed.
Final Conclusion: The order accepting the declared value and reducing the fine and penalty was sustained, and the departmental appeal was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the declared invoice value of imported goods is supported by contemporaneous documents and no legally sustainable ground for rejection is shown, the customs authorities cannot discard that value merely on suspicion.