<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Relevancy of statements under section 108 and admissibility of email printouts undermined; valuation rejection and penalties set aside</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96777</link>
    <description>Statements recorded under summons were held inadmissible because the mandatory procedure for examining the maker as a witness and determining admissibility under statutory safeguards was not followed; therefore those statements could not support re-determination of transaction value, and associated penalties were unsustainable. Email and computer printouts were also inadmissible for want of the required evidentiary certificate and formalities for computer output; absent a panchnama and the statutory certificate, the printouts could not establish undervaluation. Consequently the adjudication rejecting declared value and imposing penalties was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2026 09:36:35 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2026 09:36:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=885692" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Relevancy of statements under section 108 and admissibility of email printouts undermined; valuation rejection and penalties set aside</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96777</link>
      <description>Statements recorded under summons were held inadmissible because the mandatory procedure for examining the maker as a witness and determining admissibility under statutory safeguards was not followed; therefore those statements could not support re-determination of transaction value, and associated penalties were unsustainable. Email and computer printouts were also inadmissible for want of the required evidentiary certificate and formalities for computer output; absent a panchnama and the statutory certificate, the printouts could not establish undervaluation. Consequently the adjudication rejecting declared value and imposing penalties was set aside.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2026 09:36:35 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96777</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>