2025-VIL-2095-CESTAT-CHE-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs – Rejection of Transaction value of consignment import, Postponement of duty payment – Appellant imported gold bars and declared a certain value in the Bills of Entry. The Revenue authorities sought to ascertain the correct transaction value as the duty was paid on the declared value, and the B/E were assessed based on the declared value. Upon scrutiny of the details provided by the appellant, it was found that the amount actually remitted to the foreign suppliers was higher than the value declared in the B/E - Whether the addition under the guise of short-payment of duty, which related to the actual remittances made by the appellant to its foreign suppliers as compared to the declared/transaction value at the time of import, is justified in law – HELD - The appellant has claimed that the gold was imported on a consignment basis, and the ownership remained with the supplier. The appellant, being a nominated bank, had imported the gold on a consignment basis, and the remittances towards the cost of import were made as and when the sales took place, in accordance with the provisions of the agreement entered into between the overseas supplier and the appellant-bank. The duty was paid on the declared value, which was the internationally prevailing gold price as on the date of import, based on the suppliers' invoices. Any postponement of duty payment cannot have any impact on the transaction value, as the transaction value is the one admittedly paid at the time of import. The rejection of the transaction value is unjustified, and so is the demand of the alleged short-payment made by the Revenue - the impugned Order-in-Appeal is set aside and the appeal is allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page