Differential Customs Duty Demand and Penalties Quashed for Lack of Proper Procedure Under Section 138C

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The CESTAT set aside the confirmed demand of differential customs duty and interest based on four invoices allegedly retrieved from a mobile phone, as the procedure under Section 138C of the Customs Act, 1962 was not followed and the evidence was inadmissible. The adjudicating authority's revaluation of 165 Bills of Entry over five years without proper comparison or verification of goods lacked material basis and violated valuation rules. The appellant's contemporaneous import data was accepted, and the arbitrary duty demand was quashed. Penalties under Sections 112(b), 114A, and 114AA imposed on both appellants were also set aside, including the penalty on appellant 2 under Section 112(b), as no offense was established against him. All demands and penalties were annulled, and the appeal was allowed.....