Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
CESTAT set aside the order-in-original enhancing assessable value and demanding differential customs duty, interest, confiscation, redemption fine and penalties. It held that the department failed to discharge the burden of proving under-valuation, having relied only on comparison with prices of other importers' consignments from different suppliers without cogent evidence of extra consideration or parallel invoices. The Tribunal further held that export documents from Uzbekistan relied upon by the department were neither supplied to the importer nor shown to be reliable, and the unsigned commercial invoice had no evidentiary value. Statements recorded under s.108 CA, 1962 were held inadmissible for non-compliance with s.138B, vitiating findings based on them.
CESTAT set aside the order-in-original enhancing assessable value and demanding differential customs duty, interest, confiscation, redemption fine and penalties. It held that the department failed to discharge the burden of proving under-valuation, having relied only on comparison with prices of other importers' consignments from different suppliers without cogent evidence of extra consideration or parallel invoices. The Tribunal further held that export documents from Uzbekistan relied upon by the department were neither supplied to the importer nor shown to be reliable, and the unsigned commercial invoice had no evidentiary value. Statements recorded under s.108 CA, 1962 were held inadmissible for non-compliance with s.138B, vitiating findings based on them.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
