https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779702 CESTAT-Mumbai (AT) allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that customs authorities lacked power under section 28, Customs Act, 1962, to revise value and recover additional duty beyond the scope of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007. Additional duty aims at national treatment and cannot substitute for legal-metrology enforcement of price/marking, which lies with metrology authorities and, where empowered, under section 47, Customs Act. Proviso to section 3(2), CTA, did not apply on the facts and no basis existed for reassessment of the imported goods' value. en-us Wed, 17 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Oct 2025 09:01:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779702 CESTAT-Mumbai (AT) allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that customs authorities lacked power under section 28, Customs Act, 1962, to revise value and recover additional duty beyond the scope of Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007. Additional duty aims at national treatment and cannot substitute for legal-metrology enforcement of price/marking, which lies with metrology authorities and, where empowered, under section 47, Customs Act. Proviso to section 3(2), CTA, did not apply on the facts and no basis existed for reassessment of the imported goods' value. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 17 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779702