New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2017 (5) TMI 929 - CESTAT MUMBAI

2017 (5) TMI 929 - CESTAT MUMBAI - TMI - Valuation of confiscated goods - 4247.56 carats of rough diamonds - The exporter had declared a value of ₹ 28,57,000 in the shipping bill which was re-assessed at ₹ 72,76,799 and subject to proceedings u/s 113 and 114 of CA, 1962 - case of appellant is that the adoption of the value recommended by the ‘trade panel’ would, therefore, not be in consonance with the directions of the Tribunal - whether invocation of section 113 (i) of Customs Act, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iate or remit the differential value from, or to, the buyer, or supplier, respectively. In the circumstances, the disallowance of exports even after imposition of redemption fine is not justified by law. - There is no justifiable reason for the adjudicating authority to accept the value recommended by trade panel and there is also no finding to sustain the invoking of section 113 (i) of CA, 1962 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C/742/2006 - A/86817/17/CB - Dated:- 8-12-201 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

7; 3,00,000. The exporter had declared a value of ₹ 28,57,000 in the shipping bill which was re-assessed at ₹ 72,76,799 and subject to proceedings under section 113 and 114 of Customs Act, 1962. Against the imposition of redemption fine of ₹ 15,00,000 and penalty of ₹ 5,00,000, the exporter appealed to the Tribunal which remanded the matter back to the original authority with a direction that the valuation should be done by independent experts chosen by the exporter and t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f the Tribunal to determine the value had not been complied with. It is also the contention that the original authority had not considered their submission that the diamonds were part of a lot that had been imported earlier and, being exported as such, was to be valued on the same terms as had been assessed then. They also further contend that the invoking of section 113 (i) of Customs Act, 1962 was inappropriate. 3. We have heard Learned Counsel for appellant and the Learned Authorised Represen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

had been made available to the appellant. The adoption of the value recommended by the trade panel would, therefore, not be in consonance with the directions of the Tribunal. 4. The adjudicating authority has enhanced the value to that recommended by trade panel but he yet appears not be without doubts about this value for, in spite of allowing redemption of the confiscated diamonds on payment of fine of ₹ 10,00,000, apprehension is entertained that valuable foreign exchange would still be .....

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