2008 (9) TMI 67
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Abhishek Verma for Umesh Kumar Khaitan, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Revenue has filed the present appeal under Section 130E(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short, 'the Act') against the final Order No. C-II/1132/WZB/2002 dated 26-3-2002 in Appeal No. C/362/91-Bom. passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, West Regional Bench at Mumbai (for short, 'the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....559.70 Total Carats 59823.24 T.US$ $1,85,662.83/- (CIF) = Rs. 66,83,862/- 3. On physical examination, the description and weight of the three declared lots was found fair as per invoice. But on examination, customs authorities were of the opinion that the oods were overinvoiced. The goods were thereafter shown to all the Appraisers at DPCC as well as to the trade ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rinvoicing of the consignment therefore worked out to the extent of Rs. US $90015 = Rs. 32,40,540/-. The goods were proposed to be confiscated under Section 111(m) of the Act and penal action under Section 112 of the Act. 5. Assessee in its letter dated 29-1-1997 explained the actual position stating that the shipper had before hand informed that they would be sending the goods at reasonable va....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eu of confiscation. He also imposed a penalty of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only). 7. Assessee, being aggrieved, filed appeal before the Tribunal. Tribunal by its impugned order has set aside the findings recorded by the Commissioner (Customs) by observing that "the value of the goods that was declared was the transaction value. The genuineness of the invoice that the assessee pr....
TaxTMI