https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387412 The tribunal concluded that the demand for differential duty and penalties could not be sustained due to insufficient evidence to establish undervaluation of goods. The tribunal set aside the impugned order, emphasizing the lack of tenability and rejecting the penalties imposed based on inadequate evidence, including contested retracted statements and questionable authenticity of email correspondence and computer printouts. en-us Fri, 09 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Oct 2019 08:21:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387412 The tribunal concluded that the demand for differential duty and penalties could not be sustained due to insufficient evidence to establish undervaluation of goods. The tribunal set aside the impugned order, emphasizing the lack of tenability and rejecting the penalties imposed based on inadequate evidence, including contested retracted statements and questionable authenticity of email correspondence and computer printouts. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 09 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387412