https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93842 CESTAT allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order and discharged the importer-appellant and the individual accused of liability. The Tribunal held Revenue failed to discharge its burden of proof on the preponderance of probabilities: electronic documents were inadmissible, the contested valuation methodology lacked legal foundation, and the Country of Origin (COO) certificates were not successfully impugned or shown to relate to different shipments. Revenue also did not pursue corroborative investigation with foreign authorities regarding alleged fake COO certificates. Consequently, findings of anti-dumping evasion and attendant penalties could not be sustained, confiscation was inapplicable, and penalty imposition was overturned. en-us Tue, 04 Nov 2025 08:03:33 +0530 Tue, 04 Nov 2025 08:03:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93842 CESTAT allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order and discharged the importer-appellant and the individual accused of liability. The Tribunal held Revenue failed to discharge its burden of proof on the preponderance of probabilities: electronic documents were inadmissible, the contested valuation methodology lacked legal foundation, and the Country of Origin (COO) certificates were not successfully impugned or shown to relate to different shipments. Revenue also did not pursue corroborative investigation with foreign authorities regarding alleged fake COO certificates. Consequently, findings of anti-dumping evasion and attendant penalties could not be sustained, confiscation was inapplicable, and penalty imposition was overturned. Highlights Customs Tue, 04 Nov 2025 08:03:33 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93842