https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198863 Competing laboratory reports on exported leather did not justify treating the goods as misdeclared or non-conforming finished leather. Although Customs relied on a later CLRI report stating that the sample did not meet the relevant public notice norms, the earlier CLRI certificate and the divergence between the two reports left the material issue unresolved. The record also showed no independent evidence of deliberate misdeclaration or contumacious conduct by the exporter. In these circumstances, the adverse inference from the later report alone was insufficient to disturb the relief already granted, and the departmental challenge failed. en-us Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Feb 2018 17:19:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198863 Competing laboratory reports on exported leather did not justify treating the goods as misdeclared or non-conforming finished leather. Although Customs relied on a later CLRI report stating that the sample did not meet the relevant public notice norms, the earlier CLRI certificate and the divergence between the two reports left the material issue unresolved. The record also showed no independent evidence of deliberate misdeclaration or contumacious conduct by the exporter. In these circumstances, the adverse inference from the later report alone was insufficient to disturb the relief already granted, and the departmental challenge failed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198863