Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (10) TMI 568

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ional pillars. In all matters pertaining to valuation, it is, therefore, required that rejection of declared value should necessarily be followed by determination of an assessable value that has the approval of rules framed for the purpose. Neither does the show cause notice propose nor does the impugned order consummate the valuation exercise. In the absence of re-determination of value, goods cannot be said to have been mis-declared warranting imposition of penalties under section 114 on various individuals, whatever their linkage with the goods may be. Impugned order do not sustain - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C/27 to 32/2010 - A/87526-87531/2018 - Dated:- 4-10-2018 - Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t they were not, in any way, concerned with the exports which was held against them solely on the ground that the statement of various individuals, recorded during the course of investigation, made clear the complicity in procurement and export of cheaper goods. According to Learned Counsel for appellant, the Tribunal, in Shiv Kripa Ispat Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise Customs, Nashik [2009 (235) ELT 623 (Tri.-LB)], has held that the confiscation of the goods when goods are not available have the authority of law. Furthermore, reliance is placed on the decision of Tribunal in Hem Chand Gupta Sons v. Commissioner of Customs (ICD), New Delhi [2016 (330) ELT 161 (Tri.Del.)] which relied upon the decision of the Larger Bench .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bereft of allegation of mis-declaration. The presumption of overinvoicing has not been sustained in the impugned order. For entertaining mis-declaration of value, rejection of the declared value deducible from various circumstantial evidence, is making one pillar. A single pillar is unable to support a superstructure much beyond the top of its surface area; the stability of a structure is possible only with the support of additional pillars. In all matters pertaining to valuation, it is, therefore, required that rejection of declared value should necessarily be followed by determination of an assessable value that has the approval of rules framed for the purpose. Neither does the show cause notice propose nor does the impugned order con .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates