The case pertains to the import of restricted goods, ...

Importer's goods confiscated for violating min. import price rules, penalties imposed but value enhanced later.

Case Laws Customs

November 16, 2024

The case pertains to the import of restricted goods, specifically marbles and mosaics, under the Import Policy at a value lower than the Minimum Import Price notified by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT). The importer violated DGFT Notifications by importing these items below the prescribed minimum prices of US$ 60 per SQM for marbles and US$ 80 per SQM for mosaics, rendering the imports liable for confiscation under the Customs Act and the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, along with penalties. The Adjudicating Authority initially ordered confiscation and penalties, but the importer agreed to enhance the value as per the Minimum Import Price. The CESTAT upheld the demand for duty at the enhanced value based on the Minimum Import Price but set aside the confiscation and penalties, partially allowing the appeal. The CESTAT held that once the value was enhanced as per the Notifications, there was no legal necessity to treat the imports as contravening the Acts.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The case pertains to the import of restricted goods, ...

Importer's goods confiscated for violating min. import price rules, penalties imposed but value enhanced later.

Case Laws Customs

November 16, 2024

You may also like:

Release of absolutely Confiscated Imported goods - levy of penalty - Canadian Green Peas - looking into the facts of the case that the appellant is a regular importer;...

Valuation of imported goods - aircraft engine - vehicle expressly imported for a limited period and for ‘stop gap’ fitment during the overhaul of the regular engines by...

Rejection of the declared value by the original authority - The prices which were declared in the Bill of Entry were a fraction of the price of the Zhiyun brand goods...

Confiscation - fine - penalty - Mis-declaring the quantity of cigarettes imported under warehouse bill of entry for re-export purpose - The customs authorities...

Valuation of imported goods - The only ground on the basis of which the transaction value has been rejected is that the imports were made at a higher price by other...

The impact of imposing penalty and purpose of reduced penalty not fulfilled - deterring the appellant from repeating the offence - Continued violation of policy...

Recovery of Cenvat credit - goods seized and confiscated are imported goods thus the provision of the Rules 25/26 of CER not applicable to the sized imported consignment...

The Customs Broker (CB) was alleged to have violated Regulation 10(n) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulation, 2018, for failing to verify the antecedents and actual...

Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) case involving valuation of imported goods - rejection of declared value - enhancement of value. The tribunal...

Demanding differential custom duty on account of correct valuation of the car - import of second hand car - liability of importer vs liability of subsequent owner - The...

Mis-declaration of the retail Sale Price (RSP) - Evasion of payment of Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) - The case revolved around discrepancies in the declared Retail...

Release of goods - insecticides, pesticides and other agrochemicals including technical such as “Cyantraniliprole Technical” - Import through Port which is not a...

Project import - Since the goods were never used for the purpose for which it was imported, the actual user condition has been violated - Redemption fine and penalty imposed.

Absolute Confiscation - import of shoes - mis-declaration of the goods in terms of quantity and value - the impugned goods have violated the IPR and the import of these...

Penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Contravention of Rule 8(3A) - penalty under Rule 25 is not permissible, but penalty under Rule 27 is to be imposed - AT

Quick Updates: