GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
What's New Case Laws Highlights Articles News Forum Short Notes Statutory TMI SMS More ...
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2017 (5) TMI 860 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2017 (5) TMI 860 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Misdeclaration of goods - undervaluation - import of artificial leather shoes for gents and ladies - the supplier had sent branded goods which were not declared and the assessable value as also the MRP declared in the Bill of Entry cannot be accepted to be correct reflection of the facts - Confiscation - redemption fine - penalty - Held that: - As regards the valuation, we note that admittedly the goods were mis-declared i.e. instead of branded items, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the extent of differential duty. - Penalty - Held that: - the same has already been fixed on the lower side and does not require any interference. - Appeal rejected - decided in favor of appellant as regards reduction in quantum of redemption fine - other matters decided against appellant. - C/50125/2016-CU(DB) - FINAL ORDER NO. 52840/2017-CU(DB) - Dated:- 3-4-2017 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) and Shri V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Ms. Jya Saxena, Advocate for the Appella .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the representative of the appellant that the supplier had sent branded goods which were not declared and the assessable value as also the MRP declared in the Bill of Entry cannot be accepted to be correct reflection of the facts. Thereafter, the matter was taken up by the Revenue with the brand name owners as regards the IPR violation but no response was received. 3. In the above factual background adjudication was taken up by the authorities as the importer vide their letter dated 18.06.2014 wa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

held liable to confiscation with an option to the appellant to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine of ₹ 7.50 lakhs. Penalty of ₹ 1.50 lakhs stand imposed under section 112 of the Customs Act 1962. 4. Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant brings out to our notice that the entire duty along with redemption fine and penalty stand paid by them. However, she is not disputing the fact that the consignment also had branded goods but submits that they never placed the order for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Latest Notifications:

    Dated      Category

20-7-2017 Cus (NT)

20-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

19-7-2017 IT

19-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 IT

18-7-2017 CE (NT)

18-7-2017 CE

18-7-2017 GST CESS Rate

15-7-2017 Kerala SGST

14-7-2017 Andhra Pradesh SGST

14-7-2017 Cus (NT)

14-7-2017 Cus

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 Co. Law

13-7-2017 ADD

13-7-2017 ADD

12-7-2017 Jammu & Kashmir SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 Gujarat SGST

12-7-2017 CGST Rate

More Notifications


Latest Circulars:

20-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Goods and Services Tax

19-7-2017 Income Tax

18-7-2017 Customs

17-7-2017 Customs

14-7-2017 Income Tax

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

13-7-2017 Central Excise

13-7-2017 Customs

More Circulars



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version