Admissibility of inquiry statements and electronic printouts in customs adjudication requires witness examination and cross-examination before relianc...
Money laundering property attachment and third-party encumbrance rights clarified; prior bona fide interests enforceable before confiscation, 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 
