https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437860 Misdeclaration and undervaluation of imported goods attracted penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962 because the goods were found materially misdeclared in description and quantity, the declared value was rejected, and the importer admitted the mismatch and argued the case on merits. The absence of an express reference to Section 28 in the adjudication order did not by itself bar penalty, since the assessment proceeded under Section 17 and the statutory ingredients for penalty were otherwise established. The penal consequence was nevertheless moderated because the valuation adopted by the authorised valuer showed an element of arbitrariness, justifying reduction of the penalty quantum. en-us Thu, 04 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 May 2023 08:45:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437860 Misdeclaration and undervaluation of imported goods attracted penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962 because the goods were found materially misdeclared in description and quantity, the declared value was rejected, and the importer admitted the mismatch and argued the case on merits. The absence of an express reference to Section 28 in the adjudication order did not by itself bar penalty, since the assessment proceeded under Section 17 and the statutory ingredients for penalty were otherwise established. The penal consequence was nevertheless moderated because the valuation adopted by the authorised valuer showed an element of arbitrariness, justifying reduction of the penalty quantum. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 04 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437860