https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763833 Declared FOB value for export consignments was accepted because the department produced no reliable evidence of circular trading or overvaluation, and the record showed physical movement of goods, export realisation and Customs assessment at export. The distinction between FOB value and value addition under the foreign trade policy was treated as having been wrongly blurred, and the evidence cited did not establish repeated circulation of the same goods. DFCE licences were also treated as valid because the competent licensing authority had not cancelled them, and a later DGFT order had dropped cancellation proceedings on the same facts. On that basis, customs duty demand, confiscation and penalties were not sustainable. en-us Tue, 03 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Dec 2024 08:39:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763833 Declared FOB value for export consignments was accepted because the department produced no reliable evidence of circular trading or overvaluation, and the record showed physical movement of goods, export realisation and Customs assessment at export. The distinction between FOB value and value addition under the foreign trade policy was treated as having been wrongly blurred, and the evidence cited did not establish repeated circulation of the same goods. DFCE licences were also treated as valid because the competent licensing authority had not cancelled them, and a later DGFT order had dropped cancellation proceedings on the same facts. On that basis, customs duty demand, confiscation and penalties were not sustainable. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 03 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763833