Reopening assessments beyond four years requires nondisclosure of material facts; mere change of opinion or general allegations invalidates reassessme...
High Court considered valuation of seized goods based on market survey and held that once customs issued a show cause notice using market value, the burden shifted to the appellant to prove incorrect valuation; appellant's general denial and failure to substantiate valuation challenged the decision. Statements recorded under the Customs Act (s.108) were treated as admissible and not vitiated by absence of cross-examination, since the right to cross-examine is not absolute and no prejudice was shown. The court concluded the appeal raised no question of law required for maintainability under the Act and dismissed the appeal.
High Court considered valuation of seized goods based on market survey and held that once customs issued a show cause notice using market value, the burden shifted to the appellant to prove incorrect valuation; appellant's general denial and failure to substantiate valuation challenged the decision. Statements recorded under the Customs Act (s.108) were treated as admissible and not vitiated by absence of cross-examination, since the right to cross-examine is not absolute and no prejudice was shown. The court concluded the appeal raised no question of law required for maintainability under the Act and dismissed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
