The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant was...

The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant was eligible to avail the exemption under Serial No. 20 of the Notification on the import of the disputed soundbox versions, as the goods were technically 2G devices based on expert opinion and test reports. The Principal Commissioner's reliance on extraneous blog posts and Wikipedia articles to classify the goods as 4G compliant was rejected due to lack of cogent evidence. Consequently, the demand of interest was quashed, as the original demand was unsustainable. The penalty under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 was also set aside, since the appellant had correctly declared the goods and there was no evidence of mala fide intent. The goods were not liable for confiscation under section 111(m). The impugned order was therefore quashed and the appeal allowed.