https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335305 Post-export market enquiries could not be used to reopen and redetermine the FOB value of goods already exported under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Rule 5 of the Export Goods Valuation Rules, because the shipping bills had been examined and cleared and the later verification was not shown to prove short export at the time of shipment. On that basis, the revaluation was unsustainable. Once misdeclaration in export quantity and value was not established, the penalties on the exporter, its partners, and departmental officers also failed; Section 114 did not justify penalty for mere alleged dereliction of duty without proof of improper export or complicity. Drawback was remanded for recomputation on actual exports and foreign exchange realised. en-us Thu, 06 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jan 2018 14:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335305 Post-export market enquiries could not be used to reopen and redetermine the FOB value of goods already exported under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Rule 5 of the Export Goods Valuation Rules, because the shipping bills had been examined and cleared and the later verification was not shown to prove short export at the time of shipment. On that basis, the revaluation was unsustainable. Once misdeclaration in export quantity and value was not established, the penalties on the exporter, its partners, and departmental officers also failed; Section 114 did not justify penalty for mere alleged dereliction of duty without proof of improper export or complicity. Drawback was remanded for recomputation on actual exports and foreign exchange realised. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 06 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335305