https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759013 Electronic records retrieved from an importer's own mobile phone and e-mail account were treated as original evidence, so no certificate under section 138C of the Customs Act was required. The Tribunal applied electronic evidence principles and held that the certificate requirement is directed to secondary copies, not primary records. As the comparison documents matched the Bills of Entry in material particulars, including invoice numbers, dates, container details, quantities and carton particulars, the department's case of undervaluation, misdeclaration and suppression with intent to evade duty was supported. On that basis, the extended period was upheld and the re-determination of assessable value, duty demand, interest and penalties were sustained. en-us Fri, 13 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Sep 2024 10:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759013 Electronic records retrieved from an importer's own mobile phone and e-mail account were treated as original evidence, so no certificate under section 138C of the Customs Act was required. The Tribunal applied electronic evidence principles and held that the certificate requirement is directed to secondary copies, not primary records. As the comparison documents matched the Bills of Entry in material particulars, including invoice numbers, dates, container details, quantities and carton particulars, the department's case of undervaluation, misdeclaration and suppression with intent to evade duty was supported. On that basis, the extended period was upheld and the re-determination of assessable value, duty demand, interest and penalties were sustained. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 13 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759013