<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (11) TMI 752 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153868</link>
    <description>A retracted statement under section 108 can sustain enhanced valuation and differential duty where it is not shown to be involuntary and is corroborated by recovered invoices and surrounding evidence; the duty demand was upheld. Misdeclaration of value justified confiscation, redemption fine and penalty for the 12th consignment because the goods were available for confiscation. For the other consignments, redemption fine was not sustainable since the goods were not available, but the assessee&#039;s penalty was upheld for misdeclaration with intent to evade duty. The director&#039;s personal penalty under section 112 was set aside because the necessary nexus to confiscation was not established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Aug 2013 12:17:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170902" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (11) TMI 752 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153868</link>
      <description>A retracted statement under section 108 can sustain enhanced valuation and differential duty where it is not shown to be involuntary and is corroborated by recovered invoices and surrounding evidence; the duty demand was upheld. Misdeclaration of value justified confiscation, redemption fine and penalty for the 12th consignment because the goods were available for confiscation. For the other consignments, redemption fine was not sustainable since the goods were not available, but the assessee&#039;s penalty was upheld for misdeclaration with intent to evade duty. The director&#039;s personal penalty under section 112 was set aside because the necessary nexus to confiscation was not established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153868</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>