https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389774 Misdeclaration of imported goods in description and value was upheld where examination showed the goods did not match the Bill of Entry, the director admitted the misdeclaration in a Section 108 statement, and later mill test certificates were not linked to the consignment or import documents. On that basis, confiscation and penalty were sustained. However, the redemption fine and penalty were reduced because the original monetary sanctions were found excessive in light of the differential duty and value involved. The operative principle is that proven and admitted misdeclaration justifies confiscation and penalty, but the quantum of financial sanctions must remain proportionate to the record. en-us Fri, 22 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Nov 2020 10:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389774 Misdeclaration of imported goods in description and value was upheld where examination showed the goods did not match the Bill of Entry, the director admitted the misdeclaration in a Section 108 statement, and later mill test certificates were not linked to the consignment or import documents. On that basis, confiscation and penalty were sustained. However, the redemption fine and penalty were reduced because the original monetary sanctions were found excessive in light of the differential duty and value involved. The operative principle is that proven and admitted misdeclaration justifies confiscation and penalty, but the quantum of financial sanctions must remain proportionate to the record. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 22 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389774