Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Pawan Sachdeva (M.S. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Prev),

Pawan Sachdeva (M.S. vs Commissioner of Customs (Prev),

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Mar 13, 2001
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/21408

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pawan Sachdeva (M.S.

Respondent

Commissioner of Customs (Prev),

Excerpt

1. these applications are for waiver of deposit of penalty of rs. 30 lakhs imposed under section 112 of the act of pawan sachdeva (application 2511); deposit of duty of rs. 5.26 lakhs and penalties of rs. 5.26 lakhs under section 114a and rs. 5 lakhs under section 112 on m.s. international limited (application 2512) and deposit of duty of rs. 24.89 lakhs and penalty of equivalent amount under section 114a by pearl international ltd (application 2513).3. duty has been demanded, and penalties had bene imposed on the finding of the commissioner that the polyvinyl chloride resin suspension imported by pearls intercontinental limited and m.s.international limited, of both of which companies pawan sachdeva is a director was undervalued. the commissioners finds that the declared value of us$650 per tonne was lower than the lowest price for such resin quoted in platt's price bulletin.4. in its decision in adani exports ltd. vs. cce 2000 (116) elt 715 the chennai bench of the tribunal has held that the prices contained in platt's bulletin were not sufficient basis for enhancing the value of imported goods. although the tribunal in its stay order in sahil trends and others vs. cce (appeal c/127 to 129/2000 and others, applications c/stay-376 to 378/2000 and others) had noted the fact that the operation of that the order having been stayed by the supreme court would not affect its precedential value, and applying its ratio waived deposit of duty.5. accordingly, we waive deposit of the duty demanded and penalties imposed, and stay their recovery.

Full Judgment

1. These applications are for waiver of deposit of penalty of rs. 30 lakhs imposed under Section 112 of the Act of Pawan Sachdeva (application 2511); deposit of duty of Rs. 5.26 lakhs and penalties of rs. 5.26 lakhs under Section 114A and Rs. 5 lakhs under Section 112 on M.S. International Limited (application 2512) and deposit of duty of Rs. 24.89 lakhs and penalty of equivalent amount under Section 114A by Pearl International Ltd (application 2513).

3. Duty has been demanded, and penalties had bene imposed on the finding of the Commissioner that the polyvinyl chloride resin suspension imported by Pearls Intercontinental Limited and M.S.International Limited, of both of which companies Pawan Sachdeva is a director was undervalued. The Commissioners finds that the declared value of US$650 per tonne was lower than the lowest price for such resin quoted in Platt's Price Bulletin.

4. In its decision in Adani Exports Ltd. Vs. CCE 2000 (116) ELT 715 the Chennai bench of the Tribunal has held that the prices contained in Platt's Bulletin were not sufficient basis for enhancing the value of imported goods. Although the Tribunal in its stay order in Sahil Trends and Others Vs. CCE (appeal C/127 to 129/2000 and others, applications C/Stay-376 to 378/2000 and others) had noted the fact that the operation of that the order having been stayed by the Supreme Court would not affect its precedential value, and applying its ratio waived deposit of duty.

5. Accordingly, we waive deposit of the duty demanded and penalties imposed, and stay their recovery.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial