Mis-declaration and Concealment: confiscation affirmed, transaction value re-determined and mandatory penalty sustained; redemption allowed on payment...
Infrastructure facility: energy-efficient public lighting held integral to road projects, qualifying the operator as a developer and eligible for dedu...
CESTAT held that preferential exemption could not be denied by rejecting the Certificate of Origin and recomputing Local Value Added Content through an alternate method contrary to the Interim Rules of Origin. The Rules required computation with reference to FOB value and CIF value of non-originating materials, and the designated foreign authority's certificate could not be ignored without using the prescribed verification mechanism. Because the importer had produced the certificate and was not required to verify the supplier's internal cost structure, the exemption claim remained valid. Once exemption was upheld, the duty demand failed, and the extended period and penalties under Sections 114A and 114AA were unsustainable for want of wilful suppression or intent to evade duty.
CESTAT held that preferential exemption could not be denied by rejecting the Certificate of Origin and recomputing Local Value Added Content through an alternate method contrary to the Interim Rules of Origin. The Rules required computation with reference to FOB value and CIF value of non-originating materials, and the designated foreign authority's certificate could not be ignored without using the prescribed verification mechanism. Because the importer had produced the certificate and was not required to verify the supplier's internal cost structure, the exemption claim remained valid. Once exemption was upheld, the duty demand failed, and the extended period and penalties under Sections 114A and 114AA were unsustainable for want of wilful suppression or intent to evade duty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.