There was huge difference between MRP and Invoice value and clearly reflect the extent of undervaluation of the goods, detention cannot be held as unjustified
Goods in transit— In the instant case, the appellant is engaged in business of trading activities in Ceramic Tiles.
The impugned goods and the conveyance used for the movement of goods were without any valid documents accordingly the same were detained under sub-section (1) of Section 129 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Being aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant has filed the appeal on various grounds.
Held that— Applicant never objected the value determined by the adjudicating authority and deposited the same. Further, the MRP of boxes were marked as Rs. 600/- whereas, the value shown in the Invoice was only Rs. 170/- which indicates the huge difference between MRP and Invoice value and clearly reflect the extent of undervaluation of the goods. They have not submitted anything concrete to support their contention. Therefore, appellant’s above contention is not acceptable.