Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
The Tribunal held that the appeal was maintainable despite the baggage-related objection because the department had proceeded on a smuggling case, so the section 129A bar for baggage orders did not apply. It also held that statements of unexamined witnesses could not be used to support valuation, and accepted the manufacturer's confirmed invoice as the proper basis for valuing the Jacob watch. The remand on cross-examination and valuation was set aside, confiscation was upheld, and the condition restricting redemption to re-export was struck down. The appellant was left free to redeem the goods for home consumption or re-export on payment of the stated dues, and the penalties were reduced.
The Tribunal held that the appeal was maintainable despite the baggage-related objection because the department had proceeded on a smuggling case, so the section 129A bar for baggage orders did not apply. It also held that statements of unexamined witnesses could not be used to support valuation, and accepted the manufacturer's confirmed invoice as the proper basis for valuing the Jacob watch. The remand on cross-examination and valuation was set aside, confiscation was upheld, and the condition restricting redemption to re-export was struck down. The appellant was left free to redeem the goods for home consumption or re-export on payment of the stated dues, and the penalties were reduced.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
