Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2010 (7) TMI 590

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Bill of Entry the weight of the said consignment was declared as 1946.550 CTS and the value (C.I.F) as US $ 5,81,483.60 equivalent to Rs. 2,54,39,908/-. The assessable value of the said consignment was declared in the Bill of Entry as Rs. 2,56,94,307/-. A supporting invoice, issued by the supplier, was also submitted by the importer wherein it was mentioned that there were totally 19 packets of cut and polished diamonds. The said consignment was examined in DPCC by the customs officials. On examination, only 18 packets were found inside the box as against the 19 declared in the supplier's supporting invoice. One packet, having declared weight of 96.38 CTS value of Rs. 14,75,819/- was found short. The goods were confiscated and redemptio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e importer. The penalty and the confiscation was set aside." He further relied on Northern Plastic Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise - 1998 (101) E.L.T. 549 (S.C.) wherein the Hon'ble apex court has observed that while dealing with such a claim in respect of payment of customs duty we have already observed that the declaration was in the nature of a claim made on the basis of the belief entertained by the appellant and therefore, cannot be said to be a misdeclaration as contemplated by Section 111(m) of the Customs Act. As the appellant had given full and correct particulars as regards the nature and size of the goods, it is difficult to believe that it had referred to the wrong exemption notification with any dishonest int....