https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390335 The Tribunal set aside the confiscation order of goods and the penalty imposed on the appellant, ruling in favor of the appellants. The Tribunal found no substantial evidence of misdeclaration in the bill of entry, deemed the demand for differential duty and confiscation on past imports as time-barred, rejected the rejection of transaction value, and emphasized the necessity of providing relevant documents to the appellant for a fair trial. The judgment underscored adherence to procedural fairness and proper valuation principles under the Customs Act. en-us Mon, 23 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Dec 2019 11:14:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390335 The Tribunal set aside the confiscation order of goods and the penalty imposed on the appellant, ruling in favor of the appellants. The Tribunal found no substantial evidence of misdeclaration in the bill of entry, deemed the demand for differential duty and confiscation on past imports as time-barred, rejected the rejection of transaction value, and emphasized the necessity of providing relevant documents to the appellant for a fair trial. The judgment underscored adherence to procedural fairness and proper valuation principles under the Customs Act. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 23 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390335