Misdeclaration of Quantity and Value in MACE Grade III Import: CESTAT sets aside Re-determined Value and Penalties [Read Order]
It was found that the Department failed to provide crucial documents, including the relied-upon Bill of Entry, and that the Spice Board’s report lacked clarity regarding the grade of goods
![Misdeclaration of Quantity and Value in MACE Grade III Import: CESTAT sets aside Re-determined Value and Penalties [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/CESTAT-CESTAT-Chennai-MACE-Grade-III-Import-Misdeclaration-TAXSCAN.jpg "Misdeclaration of Quantity and Value in MACE Grade III Import: CESTAT sets aside Re-determined Value and Penalties [Read Order]")
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)set aside the re-determined value, fine, and penalties in a case involving the alleged misdeclaration of quantity and value in the import of ‘MACE GRADE III’ from Indonesia. Anisha Trends,appellant-assessee, imported ‘MACE GRADE III’ from Indonesia through Chennai Seaport under Bill of Entry No....
The Chennai Bench of Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)set aside the re-determined value, fine, and penalties in a case involving the alleged misdeclaration of quantity and value in the import of ‘MACE GRADE III’ from Indonesia.
Anisha Trends,appellant-assessee, imported ‘MACE GRADE III’ from Indonesia through Chennai Seaport under Bill of Entry No. 254195 dated 3.7.2009. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) found that the quantity, grade, and value were misdeclared to evade customs duties. While the declared price was USD 4,800 per MT, a similar import through Mumbai Port showed a price of USD 6,400 per MT. An excess quantity of 590.830 Kgs was also found.
Become PF & ESIC Pro: Basic to Advance Course - Enroll Today
Based on this, the DRI issued a Show Cause Notice on 9.10.2009. The adjudicating authority(AA) rejected the declared value, redetermined it at USD 6,400 per MT, and confirmed the differential duty. Penalties were imposed. On appeal, the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) upheld the order but set aside certain penalties.
The assessee appealed before the tribunal.
The two member bench comprising P.Dinesha (Judicial Member) and M.Ajit Kumar (Technical Member) reviewed the appeal and heard both sides. The dispute involved alleged excess import of MACE and undervaluation of goods.
It found that the Department failed to provide key documents, including the relied-upon Bill of Entry, and the Spice Board’s report lacked clarity on the grade of goods. Citing a Supreme Court ruling Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore vs. M/S Brindavan Beverages (P) Ltd., the tribunal held that a vague Show Cause Notice denied the importer a fair chance to respond. It reiterated that the burden of proving undervaluation rested on the Department and that NIDB data could not be used unless it met legal criteria for identical or similar goods.
The Future of Tax and Finance: Upskill with Us
Due to these shortcomings, the appellate tribunal set aside the re-determined value, fine, and penalties. It directed that the declared price be adopted for the excess 590.83 Kgs and the appropriate duty be levied as per law.
In short,the appeal was disposed of with modifications.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
