2026-VIL-218-CESTAT-CHE-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs - Rejection of declared value, re-determination of value, demand of differential duty, confiscation of goods and imposition of penalties – Appellant imported "Recycled LDPE Granules" availing benefit under Sl.No.477 of the Customs Notification No.21/2002 - Adjudicating Authority rejected the declared value, re-determined the value, demanded differential duty, confiscated the goods and imposed penalties on the appellants - Whether the Adjudicating Authority was justified in rejecting the declared value and re-determining the value of the imported goods – HELD - The Adjudicating Authority had wrongly held that the relied upon documents were provided to the appellants along with the Show Cause Notice, when in fact the Adjudicating Authority's own letter had indicated that these documents were not available with them and a request was made to the DRI to provide the same. The denial of opportunity to the appellants to submit their response based on the relied upon documents was a violation of the principles of natural justice. Hence, the rejection of the declared value and re-determination of the value is set aside - The demands, the appropriation of deposits towards duty, the penalties imposed on the appellants and the confiscation of the goods are set aside - The appeals are disposed of - Whether the demand of differential duty under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 was valid when the assessment was provisional – HELD - The judgments of the Supreme Court and High Courts have held that the demand under Section 28 can be raised only after the final assessment of the goods. In the present case, since the assessment was provisional, the demand of differential duty under Section 28 was not valid and set it aside.

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page