New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
CGST - Acts + GST Rates GST Ntf. GST Forms GST - Manual GST - FAQ State GST Acts SGST Ntf. I. Tax Manual
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Murphy & Murphy Exclusive Versus C.C.E. New Delhi (ICD & TKD)

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, the same were declared as artificial leather .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ty - 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 Appellant Shri R.K. Manjhi, DR for the Respondent O .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

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 waived the show cause notice as also the perso .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

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 the same and the supplier had sent it by mi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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