https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779481 CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the adjudicating order that had directed recovery of differential duty with interest and penalties. The Tribunal held imported ceramic tiles should be valued in accordance with Customs Valuation Rules and that absence of retail price markings did not justify re-assessment using later list prices; re-affixation of RSP would amount to manufacture under Central Excise law and any duty consequence lies under excise provisions. The Tribunal found the adjudicating authority exceeded its powers under the Customs Act. en-us Thu, 25 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Oct 2025 08:30:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779481 CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the adjudicating order that had directed recovery of differential duty with interest and penalties. The Tribunal held imported ceramic tiles should be valued in accordance with Customs Valuation Rules and that absence of retail price markings did not justify re-assessment using later list prices; re-affixation of RSP would amount to manufacture under Central Excise law and any duty consequence lies under excise provisions. The Tribunal found the adjudicating authority exceeded its powers under the Customs Act. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 25 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779481