https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328516 The Tribunal favored the appellants by setting aside the orders reducing redemption fine and penalty imposed for goods wrongly declared as household articles but containing button cells and watch parts. The Tribunal relied on precedents like Sandhya Jewelers and Kuresh Laila cases, which set aside confiscation for goods imported through post parcels, finding that Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962 did not specifically address goods imported via post parcels. The Tribunal considered the Arun Kumar case as per incurium for not referencing relevant precedents, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellants. en-us Tue, 15 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328516 The Tribunal favored the appellants by setting aside the orders reducing redemption fine and penalty imposed for goods wrongly declared as household articles but containing button cells and watch parts. The Tribunal relied on precedents like Sandhya Jewelers and Kuresh Laila cases, which set aside confiscation for goods imported through post parcels, finding that Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962 did not specifically address goods imported via post parcels. The Tribunal considered the Arun Kumar case as per incurium for not referencing relevant precedents, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellants. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 15 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328516