2025-VIL-1963-CESTAT-CHD-CU
  1. Home
  2. 2025-VIL-1963-CESTAT-CHD-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs - Mis-declaration of imported goods, Declaration of goods as per the documents supplied by the foreign exporter, Redemption fine and penalty, Valuation – Appellant imported Heavy Melting scrap and opted for first check. The Department alleged that 90% of the consignment was of re-rollable material scrap - The case was adjudicated by imposing redemption fine and penalty - Whether there was mis-declaration on the part of the appellant regarding the quality and quantity of the imported goods when the goods were declared as per the documents supplied by the foreign exporter - HELD – There is no evidence to suggest mis-declaration on the part of the appellant. The quantity declared was marginally different and could be attributed to the weighments scale correction. Further, the report given by the Chartered Engineer suggested that the imported scrap contained re-rollable material, and the fact that the appellant had opted for first check having declared the contents of the consignment as per import documents stands in favor of the appellant - a scrap is a scrap irrespective of its origin, and what is scrap to someone may not be the same to the other. As the Department did not allege that the imported goods were used as such and not melted, the allegation of mis-declaration did not survive - As regards the value of imported goods, there is no allegation and evidence thereof that the appellants have paid the differential value to the foreign suppliers over and above the value declared in the documents. In the absence of evidence to that effect, it cannot be alleged that there was under-valuation of the imported goods. The allegation of mis-declaration is incorrect - the appeal partially allowed by setting aside the redemption fine and penalty imposed - Whether the imposition of redemption fine and penalty was justified - HELD - In the absence of evidence that the appellants had paid the differential value to the foreign suppliers over and above the value declared in the documents, the allegation of under-valuation of the imported goods could not be sustained. The Tribunal accepted the appellant's argument that the enhanced prices were accepted as the clearance was being delayed, and the Revenue did not provide any evidence to the contrary. Therefore, the impugned order imposing redemption fine and penalty was not maintainable.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Kasi Viswanathan V

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GSTR-9 & GSTR-9C of FY24-25
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?