Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The appellant provided sufficient evidence regarding the value and there was no dispute that the appellant had paid anything over and above the declared value while procuring the goods. The Apex Court held that the responsibility to prove that the High Sea Sale transaction constituted an international transfer of goods lay with the importer. Despite submitting sufficient evidence, the adjudicating authority rejected the declared value on the ground of absence of actual High Sea Sale value and included 2% notional value for assessment. As per Circular No. 32/2004, the actual High Sea Sale contract price paid by the last buyer would be construed as the transaction value u/r 4 of the Customs Valuation Rules, and inclusion of commission on a notional basis may not be appropriate. The transaction value to be considered is the transaction between the high seas supplier and the appellant, which clearly shows the consideration for the goods as declared by the appellant. Therefore, the appeal is sustainable and allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
