https://www.taxtmi.com/css/info/rss_sitemap/rss_feed.css?v=1746094055 https://www.taxtmi.com Business/Tax/Law/GST/India/Taxation/Policies/Legal/Corporate Tax/Personal Tax/Vat Law/Legal Information/Tax Information/Legal Services/Tax Services Tax Management India. Com / MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved. One stop solution for Direct Taxes and Indirect Taxes https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461424 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461424 Overvaluation of the export consignments to Bangladesh for availing higher benefit of DEPB scheme - Rejection of declared value u/r 8 of Customs Valuation (Determination of value of export goods) Rules, 2007 - confiscation of the export consignments u/s 113(d) & (i) of the C.A. 1962 - imposition of penalty u/s 114 & 114AA of the said Act - HELD THAT:- From the impugned order it is evident that the Commissioner has determined the value of impugned export consignments on the basis of the verification jointly undertaken jointly by the members of the market verification committee and Mr. Nathmal Jajodia, Director of M/s. Jai Vikshu Niketan and Sri Sandeep Jati, authorized representative of M/s. A.S, Traders. It is also noted by the Commissioner for the joint verification of the market price of the impugned goods, he had invited the conversant officers of DRI. Commissioner also refers to the communication made by the ADG DRI, refusing to be the part of such joint market verification. It is not even the case of revenue that these enquiries were conducted fraudulently. During the adjudicating proceedings commissioner has duly ordered for such market verification on the basis of the same sample that were drawn from the export consignment at the time of seizure. On the examination of the same samples and verification undertaken Commissioner has re-determined the market value of the export consignments and concluded that the value as declared by the exporters was genuine. Revenue in their appeal have sought to place reliance on the market enquiries that were conducted by the DRI without associating the exporter with the same. It is basic law of evidence that every evidence that is to be adduced in a proceedings against the person should be tested for it veracity and authenticity by the person adjudging the issue. In this case Commissioner has got the market verification done and have rejected the market enquiries undertaken by the DRI. The approach of the Commissioner cannot be faulted. Once Commissioner has concluded that the value as declared by the respondent to the Custom Authorities in India is genuine, other charges made against the exporter do not survive. Even if there are certain irregularities found in the export vis a vis the legal requirements in the destination country, (Bangladesh), the same could not be made a ground for proving the misdeclaration of value. For the irregularities committed vis a vis the legal requirements in Bangladesh, it is for the Bangladesh Authorities to proceed against the importer/ exporter of the goods. Neither show cause notice nor the appeal conclusively makes an assertion to that effect. Conclusion - The Commissioner's decision to reject the DRI's market verification upheld, due to the lack of participation by the exporter, emphasizing the need for evidence to be tested for authenticity. The fraudulent acts involving document forgery intended for Bangladeshi authorities do not constitute a violation under the Indian Customs Act, as they are not presented to Indian Customs. The appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 29 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530