This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
CESTAT Sets Aside Customs Duty Demand as Electronic Evidence Did Not Meet Section 138C Requirements
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Bhaijaan Stores Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import-II) (CESTAT Mumbai)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All CESTAT, CESTAT Mumbai
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Advertisement
Bhaijaan Stores Vs Commissioner of Customs (Import-II) (CESTAT Mumbai)
Customs Undervaluation Allegation Fails Because DRI Email Printouts Were Held Inadmissible; CESTAT Quashes Penalties Because Cross-Examination and Witness Procedure Were Not Followed; Differential Customs Duty Demand Rejected Because Retracted Statements Lacked Corroborative Evidence; Customs Valuation Enhancement Invalid Because Earlier Bill of Entry Assessments Had Attained Finality; CESTAT Relies on Supreme Court-Backed Ruling to Strike Down Undervaluation Demand.
In , the Customs, Excise and Service T...
Author Info
