https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234667 Old and used Digital Multifunction Printing and Copying Machines imported before 05.06.2012 were treated as distinct from restricted photocopier machines under the Foreign Trade Policy, so no import licence was required for that earlier period and confiscation under the Customs Act was not justified. The declared transaction value also could not be rejected where the Department relied only on a Chartered Engineer's estimate and a marginal difference in valuation, without independent evidence of additional consideration or suppression. The analysis therefore affirms that later amendments cannot be applied retrospectively to restrict earlier imports, and that undervaluation must be supported by cogent evidence. en-us Thu, 21 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234667 Old and used Digital Multifunction Printing and Copying Machines imported before 05.06.2012 were treated as distinct from restricted photocopier machines under the Foreign Trade Policy, so no import licence was required for that earlier period and confiscation under the Customs Act was not justified. The declared transaction value also could not be rejected where the Department relied only on a Chartered Engineer's estimate and a marginal difference in valuation, without independent evidence of additional consideration or suppression. The analysis therefore affirms that later amendments cannot be applied retrospectively to restrict earlier imports, and that undervaluation must be supported by cogent evidence. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 21 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234667