Transaction value between related persons requires market-equivalent pricing; importer must prove declared value mirrors ordinary international trade ...
Classification of exported insecticides under export tariff affirmed; reclassification and related penalties set aside and MEIS scrip jurisdiction rec...
Misclassification between copra and dry coconut: customs recovery and re-valuation quashed for lack of prior licensing-authority invalidation, appeals...
Extended limitation under the proviso to section 28(1) of the Customs Act was held inapplicable to the differential duty demand because the imports were cleared in 2007-08 without valuation objection, and the investigation commenced nearly three years later without evidence of wilful misstatement or suppression with intent to evade duty. A statement recorded under section 108 admitting undervaluation and willingness to pay differential duty was treated as insufficient and not determinative, and mere undervaluation, absent material showing intent to evade, cannot justify the extended period. Consequently, the demand and valuation redetermination order were set aside and the appeal was allowed. - CESTAT
Extended limitation under the proviso to section 28(1) of the Customs Act was held inapplicable to the differential duty demand because the imports were cleared in 2007-08 without valuation objection, and the investigation commenced nearly three years later without evidence of wilful misstatement or suppression with intent to evade duty. A statement recorded under section 108 admitting undervaluation and willingness to pay differential duty was treated as insufficient and not determinative, and mere undervaluation, absent material showing intent to evade, cannot justify the extended period. Consequently, the demand and valuation redetermination order were set aside and the appeal was allowed. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
