https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368446 Import valuation under Section 14 of the Customs Act and Rule 10(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules was held to follow the transaction value where freight was separately shown or otherwise ascertainable from the invoices. The department could not mechanically substitute a notional freight component of 20% of FOB value without evidentiary basis, and the insurance element was already included. As no deliberate suppression or wilful misdeclaration was proved, the consequential demand of differential duty, interest and penalties could not survive. The valuation dispute and all related fiscal liabilities were decided in favour of the importers. en-us Wed, 05 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Feb 2020 11:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368446 Import valuation under Section 14 of the Customs Act and Rule 10(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules was held to follow the transaction value where freight was separately shown or otherwise ascertainable from the invoices. The department could not mechanically substitute a notional freight component of 20% of FOB value without evidentiary basis, and the insurance element was already included. As no deliberate suppression or wilful misdeclaration was proved, the consequential demand of differential duty, interest and penalties could not survive. The valuation dispute and all related fiscal liabilities were decided in favour of the importers. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 05 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368446