https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235919 Declared import value may be rejected only on legally sustainable evidence and the Customs Valuation Rules must be applied sequentially; on the facts discussed, rejection was justified only for goods misdescribed as wall lamps and floor lamps, not for the remaining consignments. Confiscation under Section 111(d) for non-declaration of MRP depends on a clear finding that the imported goods were pre-packaged commodities for retail sale, and that foundational finding was absent. Penalty on the partners was therefore not sustained independently at that stage and was made to follow the final valuation and confiscation findings. The matter was remanded for de novo adjudication on the limited issues identified. en-us Thu, 06 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Dec 2013 15:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235919 Declared import value may be rejected only on legally sustainable evidence and the Customs Valuation Rules must be applied sequentially; on the facts discussed, rejection was justified only for goods misdescribed as wall lamps and floor lamps, not for the remaining consignments. Confiscation under Section 111(d) for non-declaration of MRP depends on a clear finding that the imported goods were pre-packaged commodities for retail sale, and that foundational finding was absent. Penalty on the partners was therefore not sustained independently at that stage and was made to follow the final valuation and confiscation findings. The matter was remanded for de novo adjudication on the limited issues identified. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 06 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235919