https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236214 Gross overvaluation of rough diamond imports, supported by contemporaneous correspondence, revised import documents, foreign supplier amendments and corroborated statements, justified rejection of the declared transaction value and adoption of the expert panel valuation. Because the imports then failed to comply with the statutory and Kimberley Process conditions, the rough diamond consignments were treated as prohibited goods, absolute confiscation was upheld and penalties were substantially sustained. By contrast, where cut and polished diamonds showed only a marginal valuation difference and the import was supported by a bill of entry and a proper documentary trail, the declared value was not displaced and confiscation and penalty were found unsustainable. en-us Thu, 17 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Sep 2015 18:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236214 Gross overvaluation of rough diamond imports, supported by contemporaneous correspondence, revised import documents, foreign supplier amendments and corroborated statements, justified rejection of the declared transaction value and adoption of the expert panel valuation. Because the imports then failed to comply with the statutory and Kimberley Process conditions, the rough diamond consignments were treated as prohibited goods, absolute confiscation was upheld and penalties were substantially sustained. By contrast, where cut and polished diamonds showed only a marginal valuation difference and the import was supported by a bill of entry and a proper documentary trail, the declared value was not displaced and confiscation and penalty were found unsustainable. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 17 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236214