https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776539 The CESTAT held that the appellant was eligible for exemption under Serial No. 20 of the Notification on import of the soundbox versions, as the devices operate on 2G network based on technical specifications and expert opinion. The Principal Commissioner's reliance on blog posts and Wikipedia articles to classify the goods as 4G compliant was rejected due to lack of cogent evidence. Consequently, the demand of interest was disallowed since the demand itself was unsustainable. The penalty under section 112(a) and confiscation under section 111(m) of the Customs Act were also set aside, as the appellant had correctly declared the goods and there was no evidence of mala fide intention. The impugned order was quashed and the appeal allowed. en-us Tue, 05 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Aug 2025 11:28:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776539 The CESTAT held that the appellant was eligible for exemption under Serial No. 20 of the Notification on import of the soundbox versions, as the devices operate on 2G network based on technical specifications and expert opinion. The Principal Commissioner's reliance on blog posts and Wikipedia articles to classify the goods as 4G compliant was rejected due to lack of cogent evidence. Consequently, the demand of interest was disallowed since the demand itself was unsustainable. The penalty under section 112(a) and confiscation under section 111(m) of the Customs Act were also set aside, as the appellant had correctly declared the goods and there was no evidence of mala fide intention. The impugned order was quashed and the appeal allowed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 05 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776539