The case involved under-valuation of imported perfumes and ...

Importers cleared of duty evasion charges for undervalued perfumes. Tribunal rules transaction value based on supplier invoices valid.

Case Laws Customs

July 3, 2024

The case involved under-valuation of imported perfumes and deodorants, leading to evasion of duty and mis-declaration of Maximum Retail Price (MRP). The issue was whether the value declared in the Bills of Entry (B/Es) should be accepted as the transaction value for Customs duty payment. The Tribunal held that the value declared in the B/Es, based on invoices from the overseas supplier, should be considered the transaction value. Rejecting the department's attempt to use MRP for valuation, it emphasized determining transaction value based on documents exchanged between parties. The Tribunal also found that the appellants, as importers and wholesalers, complied with relevant statutes and set aside all demands and penalties imposed on them.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The case involved under-valuation of imported perfumes and ...

Importers cleared of duty evasion charges for undervalued perfumes. Tribunal rules transaction value based on supplier invoices valid.

Case Laws Customs

July 3, 2024

You may also like:

Recovery of differential duty (SAD) u/s 28(1) of CA for the imports made in all the Bills of Entry along with interest and penalties - The Tribunal confirmed the...

Demand of differential Central Excise Duty with interest and penalty - inflating freight charges through their dummy transport unit - The Tribunal affirmed the...

Reversal of CENVAT Credit - the object of both the provisions is clear and the only difference is that Chapter X uses the word “remission” of duty on excisable goods”...

Penalty u/r 26(1) of Central Excise Rules, 2002 - charge of abating the evasion of duty by the Main Party - The appellant argued that since the main party's case of duty...

Importer imported footwear and evaded duty by deliberately claiming lesser IGST rate, violating N/N. 1/2017 which mandated mentioning sale price on footwear to claim...

Levy of penalty u/s 112(a) and 114A of CA - Evasion of Customs Duty - Forging of signature - high seas sale - allegation is that appellant had prior knowledge about the...

Evasion of duty -, the goods were cleared without issuing proper invoices and therefore it cannot be said that the price charged included central excise duty. In their...

Since Appellant were paying the duty utilizing the CENVAT Credit they cannot be charged for contravention of the provisions of Rule 4, 8(1), 8(3) & 8(3A) of the Central...

The Appellate Tribunal addressed issues regarding the method of valuation of electrical motors, whether to apply Rule 8 or Rule 4 of the Central Excise (Valuation)...

Revocation of Customs Broker License - The Tribunal examined each charge individually and found that the appellants were not directly involved in the mis-declaration by...

Imposition of penalty u/r 25 of CER - Second stage Dealer - Violation in respect of issuing Invoice - proper invoices were not issued and consequently, there is...

The case involved a dispute regarding the valuation of goods for central excise duty purposes. The Appellate Tribunal held that the price declared by the appellant for...

Power of tribunal to review application - It is the well laid down proposition of law that ‘in the absence of any power of ‘Review’ or ‘Recall’ vested with the...

The CESTAT Chandigarh, in a majority decision, in an appellate tribunal decision, allowed the appeal regarding the rejection of a refund claim for duty paid on outward...

The case concerns the time limit for filing a refund claim of Special Additional Duty (SAD) paid by an importer. The issue is whether the one-year limitation specified...

Quick Updates: