https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237907 The tribunal held that the appellant's goods were correctly described and classified, thus wrong classification should not lead to penal action. The tribunal also found that the enhancement of the declared value based on NIDB data was unjustified for unbranded goods. The penalty imposed on the importer was set aside due to lack of corroborating evidence. The tribunal criticized the reliance on the Deputy Commissioner's visual examination without expert opinion and emphasized the need for expert verification in the presence of contradictory reports. Manmohan Singh, in a separate judgment, supported the use of NIDB data for valuation and upheld the penalty, citing deliberate misdeclaration by the appellant. en-us Thu, 29 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Feb 2014 12:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237907 The tribunal held that the appellant's goods were correctly described and classified, thus wrong classification should not lead to penal action. The tribunal also found that the enhancement of the declared value based on NIDB data was unjustified for unbranded goods. The penalty imposed on the importer was set aside due to lack of corroborating evidence. The tribunal criticized the reliance on the Deputy Commissioner's visual examination without expert opinion and emphasized the need for expert verification in the presence of contradictory reports. Manmohan Singh, in a separate judgment, supported the use of NIDB data for valuation and upheld the penalty, citing deliberate misdeclaration by the appellant. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 29 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237907