COMMR.OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT) MUMBAI vs. M/S GANPATI OVERSEAS THR. ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI YASHPAL SHARMA

C.A. No.-004735-004736 - 2009Supreme Court2023 INSC 88106 October 2023Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA57 pages
For Petitioner: MUKESH KUMAR MARORIA
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court held that the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) was justified in setting aside the enhanced valuation and penalties. The department failed to provide sufficient evidence of contemporaneous imports at a higher price to reject the invoice price.

What were the facts?

The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence received information that M/s Ganpati Overseas had imported tuners at under-invoiced prices, evading customs duty. Investigations revealed that the supplier, M/s Arise Enterprises, was owned by a relative of the proprietor of M/s Ganpati Overseas, and both admitted to deliberately under-invoicing to save duty.

What were the issues?

Whether the department discharged its burden of proving that the invoice price was incorrect by providing evidence of contemporaneous imports at a higher price. Whether the invocation of Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation Rules was justified without such evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14,Section 135,Section 111(d),Section 111(m),Section 112(a),Section 28(1),Section 124,Section 108,Section 130-E

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
2023INSC881 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4735-4736 OF 2009 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORTS), MUMBAI APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S GANPATI OVERSEAS THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI YASHPAL SHARMA & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

UJJAL BHUYAN, J.

Since both the appeals arise out of the common judgment and final order dated 27.06.2008 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench at Mumbai with parties also being the same, the two appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2.

The appeals have been filed by the Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Mumbai under Section 130-E of the Customs Act, 1962 against the common judgment and final order dated 27.06.2008 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax 2

Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench at Mumbai (briefly the ‘CESTAT’ or ‘the Tribunal’ hereinafter) in Appeal Nos. C/1347 and 1374 of 2002.

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 14

All 685 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →