https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346816 The Tribunal set aside the duty demand made by the department, ruling that it was unjustified as it was based on presumption without concrete evidence. The appellant successfully argued against the allegations of undervaluation in previous consignments by providing evidence of importing a different brand at a lower value. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of material to support the department's presumption of consistent undervaluation and concluded that the duty demand lacked merit. As a result, the appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was overturned. en-us Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Aug 2017 07:50:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346816 The Tribunal set aside the duty demand made by the department, ruling that it was unjustified as it was based on presumption without concrete evidence. The appellant successfully argued against the allegations of undervaluation in previous consignments by providing evidence of importing a different brand at a lower value. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of material to support the department's presumption of consistent undervaluation and concluded that the duty demand lacked merit. As a result, the appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was overturned. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346816