https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94756 Documentary evidence such as fax messages, duplicate invoices and comparative import data established that the declared value did not reflect the true value of the imported goods, justifying a finding of under-valuation and confiscation. The goods were treated as parts of consumer goods, and because the importer was not shown to be the actual manufacturer, the import licence requirement under the policy was upheld and policy benefit denied. On the facts and circumstances, the redemption fine and penalty were considered excessive and were reduced. en-us Fri, 16 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Dec 2011 15:56:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94756 Documentary evidence such as fax messages, duplicate invoices and comparative import data established that the declared value did not reflect the true value of the imported goods, justifying a finding of under-valuation and confiscation. The goods were treated as parts of consumer goods, and because the importer was not shown to be the actual manufacturer, the import licence requirement under the policy was upheld and policy benefit denied. On the facts and circumstances, the redemption fine and penalty were considered excessive and were reduced. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 16 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94756