<?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>2026 (3) TMI 1386 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788631</link>
    <description>Completed assessments on earlier Bills of Entry cannot be reopened for value enhancement merely on later-recovered emails and statements, where the goods had already been cleared and no contemporaneous examination or substantial supporting evidence existed; the differential duty demand on those past consignments was therefore deleted. For the live Bill of Entry, examination findings together with bank documents and email attachments showing mismatches in description, quantity and value were sufficient to reject the declared value and redetermine transaction value; however, the consequential redemption fine and penalty were moderated because the enhancement applied to some items lacked direct value particulars and duty had already been paid with interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 09:05:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=892993" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 1386 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788631</link>
      <description>Completed assessments on earlier Bills of Entry cannot be reopened for value enhancement merely on later-recovered emails and statements, where the goods had already been cleared and no contemporaneous examination or substantial supporting evidence existed; the differential duty demand on those past consignments was therefore deleted. For the live Bill of Entry, examination findings together with bank documents and email attachments showing mismatches in description, quantity and value were sufficient to reject the declared value and redetermine transaction value; however, the consequential redemption fine and penalty were moderated because the enhancement applied to some items lacked direct value particulars and duty had already been paid with interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788631</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>