https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112793 In a customs valuation dispute involving imported zinc ingots, the applicants showed a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit of penalties because the department had adopted the highest contemporaneous price, while Rule 5 required comparison with lower comparable values and other imports were shown at lower prices. Recovery of the penalties was stayed pending the appeals. Waiver of pre-deposit of differential duty was refused because the record did not show clearance of the goods on payment of duty or loss of Customs control, so the statutory basis for dispensing with duty pre-deposit under Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 was not established. Relief was therefore limited to penalties. en-us Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 May 2012 17:36:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112793 In a customs valuation dispute involving imported zinc ingots, the applicants showed a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit of penalties because the department had adopted the highest contemporaneous price, while Rule 5 required comparison with lower comparable values and other imports were shown at lower prices. Recovery of the penalties was stayed pending the appeals. Waiver of pre-deposit of differential duty was refused because the record did not show clearance of the goods on payment of duty or loss of Customs control, so the statutory basis for dispensing with duty pre-deposit under Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962 was not established. Relief was therefore limited to penalties. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112793