https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778609 CESTAT remanded valuation for redetermination, holding the Commissioner's methodology for adding a premium was unsupported by objective/verifiable data and directing the adjudicating authority to verify the appellant's freight/insurance data (Clarksons report) and recompute assessable value. Confiscation of the imported goods was upheld due to misdeclaration of origin. Penalty under Section 112(a) on the appellant company was sustained, while additional penalty under Section 114AA was unwarranted and set aside. Personal penalty against the company's vice-president was not supported by evidence and is quashed. Matter remitted to quantify differential duty, confiscation and penalty on the company. en-us Tue, 26 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Sep 2025 08:33:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778609 CESTAT remanded valuation for redetermination, holding the Commissioner's methodology for adding a premium was unsupported by objective/verifiable data and directing the adjudicating authority to verify the appellant's freight/insurance data (Clarksons report) and recompute assessable value. Confiscation of the imported goods was upheld due to misdeclaration of origin. Penalty under Section 112(a) on the appellant company was sustained, while additional penalty under Section 114AA was unwarranted and set aside. Personal penalty against the company's vice-president was not supported by evidence and is quashed. Matter remitted to quantify differential duty, confiscation and penalty on the company. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 26 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778609