https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447796 The Tribunal held that the confiscation of the goods and the enhancement of their value were unjustified due to the lack of expert opinion proving the goods were serviceable pipes instead of scrap. The Commissioner (Appeals) had also noted the absence of such evidence. The appellant's request for mutilation suggested an intention to import scrap. Consequently, the Tribunal modified the impugned order, setting aside the enhancement of value, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty. The appeal was partly allowed in favor of the appellant. en-us Wed, 03 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Jan 2024 08:46:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447796 The Tribunal held that the confiscation of the goods and the enhancement of their value were unjustified due to the lack of expert opinion proving the goods were serviceable pipes instead of scrap. The Commissioner (Appeals) had also noted the absence of such evidence. The appellant's request for mutilation suggested an intention to import scrap. Consequently, the Tribunal modified the impugned order, setting aside the enhancement of value, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty. The appeal was partly allowed in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 03 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447796