https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=82783 Imported goods did not correspond to the description in the Bill of Entry, with a discrepancy in thickness. The transaction value was correctly rejected u/r 12 due to reasonable doubt about its truth and accuracy. With no imports of identical goods, the value was rightly determined u/r 5. Confiscation of goods u/s 111(m) and redemption fine u/s 125 were justified as the appellant intentionally misdeclared the nature of goods to evade duty. Penalties u/ss 114AA and 112 were correctly imposed. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the adjudicating authority's order, dismissing the appeal. en-us Tue, 05 Nov 2024 13:34:46 +0530 Tue, 05 Nov 2024 13:34:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=82783 Imported goods did not correspond to the description in the Bill of Entry, with a discrepancy in thickness. The transaction value was correctly rejected u/r 12 due to reasonable doubt about its truth and accuracy. With no imports of identical goods, the value was rightly determined u/r 5. Confiscation of goods u/s 111(m) and redemption fine u/s 125 were justified as the appellant intentionally misdeclared the nature of goods to evade duty. Penalties u/ss 114AA and 112 were correctly imposed. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the adjudicating authority's order, dismissing the appeal. Highlights Customs Tue, 05 Nov 2024 13:34:46 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=82783