9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent Per: D.N. Panda The precise submission of the appellant in this appeal is that there was rejection of transaction value of the import of "Lux" brand soaps declared by the appellant. Accordingly, department imposed redemption fine of Rs. 6,00,000/- on confiscation of the goods and a penalty of Rs. 5,80,264/- was imposed under Section 114 A of the Customs Act, 1962, on the importer M/s. Safi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned order, has brought out the reason for disturbance of the declared value and applied Rule 4 (1) of Customs Valuation Rules, 1998, stating reason therefor. There is no evidence led by appellant importer to controvert the action of the Authority and to rule out application of the said Rule. In absence of any material to suggest that the said Rule is not invokable, it appears that the departm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods subject to MRP. Certain calculations were made by the authority at page-20 of the impugned as to the retail price of the offending goods. Looking to such calculation, a reasonable profit of 20% appears to be the gain made by the appellant importer. Therefore, redemption fine is reduced to 20% of the value of Rs. 23,23,159/- determined by Adjudicating Authority. While imposing redemption fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
