https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379664 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for the payment of the differential duty upheld by the Original Authority and Commissioner (Appeals). It ruled that the liability for duty payment on transferred goods, due to an incorrect exchange rate declared in the Warehouse Bill of Entry, rests with the transferee who filed the Ex-bond Bill-of-Entry for home consumption, not the original owner. The judgment clarified that the appellant should not be held accountable for the duty payment in such circumstances, emphasizing the transferee's responsibility based on Customs Act provisions. en-us Fri, 05 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Mar 2020 12:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379664 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for the payment of the differential duty upheld by the Original Authority and Commissioner (Appeals). It ruled that the liability for duty payment on transferred goods, due to an incorrect exchange rate declared in the Warehouse Bill of Entry, rests with the transferee who filed the Ex-bond Bill-of-Entry for home consumption, not the original owner. The judgment clarified that the appellant should not be held accountable for the duty payment in such circumstances, emphasizing the transferee's responsibility based on Customs Act provisions. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 05 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379664