https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118029 The case involved ceramic tile manufacturers in Gujarat accused of undervaluation and duty evasion. The Commissioner confirmed duty demands at lower amounts than proposed, prompting Revenue to appeal. The Tribunal found the Commissioner's evidence evaluation lacking and re-computed duty demands based on confirmed undervaluation. The Tribunal limited duty demands to specific parties/regions proven to receive undervalued goods, rejecting extension without adequate proof. Cross-objections were dismissed. The impugned orders were set aside for fresh quantification of duty demands and penalties, emphasizing penalties correlate with duty amounts. en-us Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Jun 2012 18:37:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118029 The case involved ceramic tile manufacturers in Gujarat accused of undervaluation and duty evasion. The Commissioner confirmed duty demands at lower amounts than proposed, prompting Revenue to appeal. The Tribunal found the Commissioner's evidence evaluation lacking and re-computed duty demands based on confirmed undervaluation. The Tribunal limited duty demands to specific parties/regions proven to receive undervalued goods, rejecting extension without adequate proof. Cross-objections were dismissed. The impugned orders were set aside for fresh quantification of duty demands and penalties, emphasizing penalties correlate with duty amounts. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118029