https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379605 The Tribunal upheld the demand for duty along with interest, stating that the notice was valid despite lack of specific legal provisions cited. The Tribunal rejected the time-barred argument and upheld duty enforcement based on bond conditions. The penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act was set aside as no goods were confiscated. Duty liability for non-excisable goods production was confirmed, and penalty imposition on an individual was deemed unnecessary due to lack of goods seizure. The appellants were required to pay duty and interest, with the penalty being overturned for one party. en-us Tue, 09 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 May 2019 18:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379605 The Tribunal upheld the demand for duty along with interest, stating that the notice was valid despite lack of specific legal provisions cited. The Tribunal rejected the time-barred argument and upheld duty enforcement based on bond conditions. The penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act was set aside as no goods were confiscated. Duty liability for non-excisable goods production was confirmed, and penalty imposition on an individual was deemed unnecessary due to lack of goods seizure. The appellants were required to pay duty and interest, with the penalty being overturned for one party. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 09 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379605