https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286188 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant. It found that the use of the term 'speaker' in the goods description did not mislead during examination, as it was also applicable to an iPod dock. The Tribunal considered factors like import regularity and relationship between supplier and importer in determining that there was no intentional mis-declaration. Consequently, the order of confiscation and penalty imposition was not upheld, leading to a favorable outcome for the appellant in the case. en-us Tue, 07 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Feb 2020 11:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286188 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant. It found that the use of the term 'speaker' in the goods description did not mislead during examination, as it was also applicable to an iPod dock. The Tribunal considered factors like import regularity and relationship between supplier and importer in determining that there was no intentional mis-declaration. Consequently, the order of confiscation and penalty imposition was not upheld, leading to a favorable outcome for the appellant in the case. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 07 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286188