https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264647 The tribunal found the appellants liable for mis-declaration of Retail Sale Price (RSP) and selling goods at higher prices than declared, resulting in evasion of duty. Goods were confiscated for not bearing the MRP on packaging, violating SWM Act, 1976 and PC Rules, 1977. Differential duty and penalties were imposed, but recalculated to apply only to sales to specific customers. The penalty on the director was reduced due to a genuine belief in inapplicability of certain regulations. The appeal was partly allowed, setting aside some demands while upholding others with reduced penalties and fines. en-us Fri, 07 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Jan 2016 12:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264647 The tribunal found the appellants liable for mis-declaration of Retail Sale Price (RSP) and selling goods at higher prices than declared, resulting in evasion of duty. Goods were confiscated for not bearing the MRP on packaging, violating SWM Act, 1976 and PC Rules, 1977. Differential duty and penalties were imposed, but recalculated to apply only to sales to specific customers. The penalty on the director was reduced due to a genuine belief in inapplicability of certain regulations. The appeal was partly allowed, setting aside some demands while upholding others with reduced penalties and fines. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 07 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264647