Declared value was rejected where the imported stock-lot goods...

Declared value was rejected where the imported stock-lot goods were found to be about 7% higher in quantity than declared, and that discrepancy, with the importer's acceptance of enhanced value, justified doubt about transaction value; re-determination under Rule 12 and Rule 5 was sustained. The Tribunal held that the import had not yet reached the post-clearance stage, so the matter was one of re-assessment under section 17, not recovery of short-paid duty under section 28, and that the section 28 basis was legally incorrect. It further held that goods merely liable to confiscation are not automatically confiscable, and set aside confiscation, redemption fine, and the consequential section 114A penalty.