https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761896 CESTAT New Delhi set aside customs duty demand against car importer. Revenue alleged short-payment of duty claiming original invoices were FOB terms requiring freight/insurance addition to transaction value. CESTAT found supplementary invoices lacked authentication, no evidence of payments through banking or unofficial channels, and freight forwarder export declarations were statistical documents without contractual significance. Court held contract remained on CIP/DAP terms with seller bearing risk liability until import. Without reliable evidence of contract alteration or excluded freight/insurance costs, declared price remained valid transaction value. Differential duty demand, confiscation, and penalties under sections 28, 111, 112, and 114A were unsustainable. Appeals allowed. en-us Mon, 18 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Nov 2024 14:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761896 CESTAT New Delhi set aside customs duty demand against car importer. Revenue alleged short-payment of duty claiming original invoices were FOB terms requiring freight/insurance addition to transaction value. CESTAT found supplementary invoices lacked authentication, no evidence of payments through banking or unofficial channels, and freight forwarder export declarations were statistical documents without contractual significance. Court held contract remained on CIP/DAP terms with seller bearing risk liability until import. Without reliable evidence of contract alteration or excluded freight/insurance costs, declared price remained valid transaction value. Differential duty demand, confiscation, and penalties under sections 28, 111, 112, and 114A were unsustainable. Appeals allowed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 18 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761896