https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126051 Misdeclaration and undervaluation supported by contemporaneous evidence justified the duty demand, redemption fine, and penalty on the firm, since the goods were found to differ from the invoice description and no bona fide mistake was shown. A separate penalty on the partner was set aside because the firm had already been penalised for the same conduct and no further basis for individual liability was established. Confiscation of the transport truck was also set aside because there was no evidence that the driver or owner knew of the misdeclaration or undervaluation, and a transporter was not required to verify the invoice contents absent incriminating material. en-us Fri, 27 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:53:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126051 Misdeclaration and undervaluation supported by contemporaneous evidence justified the duty demand, redemption fine, and penalty on the firm, since the goods were found to differ from the invoice description and no bona fide mistake was shown. A separate penalty on the partner was set aside because the firm had already been penalised for the same conduct and no further basis for individual liability was established. Confiscation of the transport truck was also set aside because there was no evidence that the driver or owner knew of the misdeclaration or undervaluation, and a transporter was not required to verify the invoice contents absent incriminating material. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126051