2026-VIL-215-CESTAT-DEL-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs – Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962 – Rules 3 and 12 of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007 – Import of furniture – Rejection of declared value – Demand of differential duty – Appellant had purchased furniture locally from importers against proper bills on payment of applicable taxes – After following due process of law, Principal Commissioner rejected declared value of imported goods under Rule 12 of the Rules, re-determined same under Rule 3 of the Rules and confirmed demand of differential customs duty – Whether statements of persons recorded under Section 108 of the Act could have been relied upon by Principal Commissioner for rejecting the transaction value – HELD – Principal Commissioner had relied upon statements made by various persons under Section 108 of the Act to record a finding regarding mis-declaration and undervaluation of goods, but said statements were retracted by Appellant in their replies. During proceedings before Principal Commissioner, Appellant had sought cross examination of certain persons, but such request was rejected by Principal Commissioner. In such circumstances, statements of persons recorded under Section 108 of the Act could not have been relied upon by Principal Commissioner for rejecting transaction value and re-determining the same. In absence of any certificate, print outs could not have been considered for purposes of reaching a conclusion regarding undervaluation. Impugned order passed by Principal Commissioner is set aside – Appeals allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page