https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99029 Forensic extraction from a director's mobile phone was treated as admissible without a separate section 138C certificate because the phone was recovered under panchnama and examined in context with the surrounding record. Rule 12 permitted rejection of declared transaction value where reasonable doubt arose from the director's statement and parallel invoices showing higher values, so re-determination of assessable value was upheld. Misdeclaration of value attracted confiscation under section 111(m), and the same undisclosed invoices justified invocation of the extended period under section 28(4). Differential duty and equal penalty under section 114A were sustained, but separate penalties under section 114AA were set aside. en-us Wed, 22 Apr 2026 08:47:19 +0530 Wed, 22 Apr 2026 08:47:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99029 Forensic extraction from a director's mobile phone was treated as admissible without a separate section 138C certificate because the phone was recovered under panchnama and examined in context with the surrounding record. Rule 12 permitted rejection of declared transaction value where reasonable doubt arose from the director's statement and parallel invoices showing higher values, so re-determination of assessable value was upheld. Misdeclaration of value attracted confiscation under section 111(m), and the same undisclosed invoices justified invocation of the extended period under section 28(4). Differential duty and equal penalty under section 114A were sustained, but separate penalties under section 114AA were set aside. Highlights Customs Wed, 22 Apr 2026 08:47:19 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99029