https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83737 Goods imported under a Letter of Authority for NRSA were treated as imports made for and on behalf of the Government department, because the agreement expressly required the appellants to act in that capacity and the documentary record supported that position. The 35% CIF component was regarded as remuneration for services, not a profit-sharing term showing a sale transaction. A stray reference to margin of profit in correspondence was treated as an inadvertent misstatement that could not outweigh the Letter of Authority, NRSA certificate, and import documents. Filing the Bill of Entry in the appellants' own name was not fatal where the procedure permitted Letter of Authority holders to cause the import, so confiscation, redemption fine, and personal penalty were unsustainable. en-us Fri, 19 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Jul 2011 13:19:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83737 Goods imported under a Letter of Authority for NRSA were treated as imports made for and on behalf of the Government department, because the agreement expressly required the appellants to act in that capacity and the documentary record supported that position. The 35% CIF component was regarded as remuneration for services, not a profit-sharing term showing a sale transaction. A stray reference to margin of profit in correspondence was treated as an inadvertent misstatement that could not outweigh the Letter of Authority, NRSA certificate, and import documents. Filing the Bill of Entry in the appellants' own name was not fatal where the procedure permitted Letter of Authority holders to cause the import, so confiscation, redemption fine, and personal penalty were unsustainable. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 19 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83737