Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2019 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 1093 - AT - CustomsRejection of declared value - short paid the duty on the imported consignment by misdeclaring the value - Penalty - benefit of first proviso to Section 114A of the Customs Act - HELD THAT:- We do not know what was consideration of the evidence and submissions made by the appellant which lead to rejection of the declared value by the Appellants. Rejection of declared value on Bill of Entry is a serious affair and the same could have been rejected on the basis of cogent examination of evidences and justifiable reasons. Neither the adjudicating authority or Commissioner (Appeal), have pointed to such special circumstance warranting the rejection of the declared transaction value by the Appellant on Bill of Entry. From plain reading of the rule 12 it is quite evident that the word “doubt” used in the rule do not refers to the doubt of a doubting Thomas, but said doubt has to be based on cogent reasons and evidences. No cogent evidence or reason has been put forth in the present case to justify the “doubt” of the assessing officer. If the case of the revenue was that contemporaneous imports were at higher price, could they have proceeded without referring to NIDB maintained by the revenue itself. Without even referring to their own database both adjudicating authority and Commissioner (Appeal) have rejected the declared value on the basis of the certain emails which were not with the reference to imports under consideration. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|