https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88015 Non-disclosure in the bill of entry of an amount payable to a local indenting agent justified inclusion in assessable value where the importer could not prove any identifiable split between commission, technical advice and installation charges. The stated reasoning treats the entire amount as commission and finds that a specific column existed for disclosure of commission payable, so omission of that figure amounted to misdeclaration. On that basis, confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 was upheld, and the challenge to inclusion, confiscation and redemption fine failed. en-us Tue, 15 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Sep 2011 14:09:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88015 Non-disclosure in the bill of entry of an amount payable to a local indenting agent justified inclusion in assessable value where the importer could not prove any identifiable split between commission, technical advice and installation charges. The stated reasoning treats the entire amount as commission and finds that a specific column existed for disclosure of commission payable, so omission of that figure amounted to misdeclaration. On that basis, confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 was upheld, and the challenge to inclusion, confiscation and redemption fine failed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 15 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88015