https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236742 The tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order confirming duty demand, interest recovery, and penalties on the assessee-company for importing sugar below the required sucrose content, disqualifying them from duty exemptions. While manipulation of lab reports was proven, individuals responsible could not be identified, leading to penalties being sustained only on the assessee-company. The tribunal allowed appeals by other officials and CHA due to insufficient evidence linking them to tampering, rejecting the appeal by the assessee-company. The validity of demand under Section 28 without challenging provisional assessment was affirmed based on the date of finalization of the assessment. en-us Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Oct 2013 18:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236742 The tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order confirming duty demand, interest recovery, and penalties on the assessee-company for importing sugar below the required sucrose content, disqualifying them from duty exemptions. While manipulation of lab reports was proven, individuals responsible could not be identified, leading to penalties being sustained only on the assessee-company. The tribunal allowed appeals by other officials and CHA due to insufficient evidence linking them to tampering, rejecting the appeal by the assessee-company. The validity of demand under Section 28 without challenging provisional assessment was affirmed based on the date of finalization of the assessment. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236742