https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95353 The dominant issue was whether mobile phones seized for invoice mismatch and regulatory non-compliance were liable to confiscation and penalties under the Customs Act. The adjudicating authority correctly treated 3,998 phones as smuggled since the invoices relied on by the importer did not match the documents filed with the Bill of Entry, warranting confiscation; 2,886 phones were properly allowed redemption on fine, and 1,012 phones were rightly subjected to absolute confiscation because import without valid IMEI numbers is prohibited. Separately, absence of MRP/RSP stickers breached FTP requirements and section 4A compliance, justifying confiscation of the 2,886 phones. Penalties imposed on the importing entity and its responsible persons were upheld as proportionate, and the appeals were dismissed. - CESTAT en-us Wed, 24 Dec 2025 07:51:29 +0530 Wed, 24 Dec 2025 07:51:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95353 The dominant issue was whether mobile phones seized for invoice mismatch and regulatory non-compliance were liable to confiscation and penalties under the Customs Act. The adjudicating authority correctly treated 3,998 phones as smuggled since the invoices relied on by the importer did not match the documents filed with the Bill of Entry, warranting confiscation; 2,886 phones were properly allowed redemption on fine, and 1,012 phones were rightly subjected to absolute confiscation because import without valid IMEI numbers is prohibited. Separately, absence of MRP/RSP stickers breached FTP requirements and section 4A compliance, justifying confiscation of the 2,886 phones. Penalties imposed on the importing entity and its responsible persons were upheld as proportionate, and the appeals were dismissed. - CESTAT Highlights Customs Wed, 24 Dec 2025 07:51:29 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95353