https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187425 The Tribunal upheld the decision to adopt $6 as the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) value for both entries, ensuring consistency and fairness in valuation. It deemed the redemption fine imposed on the appellant appropriate, as penalizing for declaring different MRPs for identical goods imported simultaneously was unjustified. The penalty of Rs. 20,000 was upheld, partially allowing the assessee's appeal while dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The judgment provided a comprehensive resolution to the issues raised, affirming decisions made in lower proceedings and concluding the case. en-us Tue, 19 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Oct 2016 10:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187425 The Tribunal upheld the decision to adopt $6 as the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) value for both entries, ensuring consistency and fairness in valuation. It deemed the redemption fine imposed on the appellant appropriate, as penalizing for declaring different MRPs for identical goods imported simultaneously was unjustified. The penalty of Rs. 20,000 was upheld, partially allowing the assessee's appeal while dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The judgment provided a comprehensive resolution to the issues raised, affirming decisions made in lower proceedings and concluding the case. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 19 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187425