https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35198 Assessable value cannot be enhanced by adopting the price of a different imported model unless the basis of comparability is established under the valuation rules; without proof that the models are identical or sufficiently similar, the differential duty demand fails. Confiscation for contravention of the import prohibition was sustained, but the redemption fine and penalty were reduced because the order did not show a reasoned quantification or examination of likely margin of profit. The decision therefore upheld confiscation while setting aside the valuation-based duty enhancement and scaling down the penal consequences. en-us Thu, 09 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35198 Assessable value cannot be enhanced by adopting the price of a different imported model unless the basis of comparability is established under the valuation rules; without proof that the models are identical or sufficiently similar, the differential duty demand fails. Confiscation for contravention of the import prohibition was sustained, but the redemption fine and penalty were reduced because the order did not show a reasoned quantification or examination of likely margin of profit. The decision therefore upheld confiscation while setting aside the valuation-based duty enhancement and scaling down the penal consequences. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 09 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35198