https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782348 CESTAT New Delhi partly allowed Revenue's appeal. It upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s setting aside of the Joint Commissioner's rejection and re-determination of FOB value under the Valuation Rules, holding that the transaction value had not been validly rejected and could not be redetermined under rule 6. However, it restored the Joint Commissioner's reclassification of the export garments under the correct serial numbers of the Drawback and ROSCTL schedules, as tests showed the goods were of blended fabrics, not 100% cotton. CESTAT also restored the penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 under section 114(iii), while sustaining the setting aside of redemption fine and penalty under section 114AA. en-us Wed, 26 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Nov 2025 08:24:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782348 CESTAT New Delhi partly allowed Revenue's appeal. It upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s setting aside of the Joint Commissioner's rejection and re-determination of FOB value under the Valuation Rules, holding that the transaction value had not been validly rejected and could not be redetermined under rule 6. However, it restored the Joint Commissioner's reclassification of the export garments under the correct serial numbers of the Drawback and ROSCTL schedules, as tests showed the goods were of blended fabrics, not 100% cotton. CESTAT also restored the penalty of Rs. 2,00,000 under section 114(iii), while sustaining the setting aside of redemption fine and penalty under section 114AA. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 26 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782348