https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245223 In an appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, interference is limited to a substantial question of law, and a challenge directed only at concurrent factual findings is insufficient. Imported retail-pack goods were found without MRP stickers, and the proprietor's Section 108 statement supported the conclusion that the goods required MRP disclosure under the applicable import and packaging regime. On those facts, the lower authorities treated the import as contravening Sections 111(d) and 111(m), and the Tribunal found the confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty reasonable. No substantial question of law arose, so the confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty were upheld. en-us Fri, 21 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Nov 2014 11:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245223 In an appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, interference is limited to a substantial question of law, and a challenge directed only at concurrent factual findings is insufficient. Imported retail-pack goods were found without MRP stickers, and the proprietor's Section 108 statement supported the conclusion that the goods required MRP disclosure under the applicable import and packaging regime. On those facts, the lower authorities treated the import as contravening Sections 111(d) and 111(m), and the Tribunal found the confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty reasonable. No substantial question of law arose, so the confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty were upheld. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 21 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245223