https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781747 CESTAT held that the imported product was aluminum foil of 0.0053 mm thickness as shown in the commercial invoice, not 0.053 mm as mentioned in the Bill of Entry. Since foil of 0.0053 mm does not attract anti-dumping duty under Notification No. 23/2017 dated 16.05.2017, the anti-dumping demand was unsustainable. The tribunal further held that the customs value of USD 2.79/kg stated in the invoice was correct and that the department's adoption of USD 3.6/kg was unsupported by evidence. Finding no short payment of customs duty, CESTAT set aside the demand of differential duty and allowed the appeal. en-us Wed, 12 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Nov 2025 08:42:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781747 CESTAT held that the imported product was aluminum foil of 0.0053 mm thickness as shown in the commercial invoice, not 0.053 mm as mentioned in the Bill of Entry. Since foil of 0.0053 mm does not attract anti-dumping duty under Notification No. 23/2017 dated 16.05.2017, the anti-dumping demand was unsustainable. The tribunal further held that the customs value of USD 2.79/kg stated in the invoice was correct and that the department's adoption of USD 3.6/kg was unsupported by evidence. Finding no short payment of customs duty, CESTAT set aside the demand of differential duty and allowed the appeal. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 12 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781747