Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesBangalore DRI | Retraction of Statement, Unverified Electronic Invoices Can’t Justify Customs...

Bangalore DRI | Retraction of Statement, Unverified Electronic Invoices Can’t Justify Customs Undervaluation Demand: CESTAT

Indirect Taxes

Published on

By Mariya Paliwala
Bangalore DRI | Retraction of Statement, Unverified Electronic Invoices Can’t Justify Customs Undervaluation Demand: CESTAT

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench has set aside the differential duty demand, holding that a retracted statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act and unverified electronic invoices cannot form the sole basis for alleging undervaluation. The bench of P. Dinesha (Judicial Member) and Vasa Seshagiri Rao (Technical…

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Case Compilation

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 16 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for  September 16, 2026.GSTGST REVOCATION ORDER QUASHED AFTER...
GST

CBIC Circulars Not Binding On GSTAT; Inverted Duty Refund Available Where Inputs And Finished Goods Are Distinct: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Kolkata Bench, has upheld a refund...
Supreme Court

Money Received by Intermediary Not Enough to Prove Public Servant Accepted Bribe: Supreme Court Acquits RPF Officer

The Supreme Court has acquitted a former Divisional Security Commissioner of the Railway Protection...
Supreme Court

Loan Recovery Can’t Become “Instrument of Oppression”: Supreme Court Awards Rs.10 Lakh Compensation for Midnight Repossession of Truck

The Supreme Court has strongly deprecated the forcible repossession of a borrower’s truck by...

More like this

Case Compilation

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 16 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for  September 16, 2026.GSTGST REVOCATION ORDER QUASHED AFTER...
GST

CBIC Circulars Not Binding On GSTAT; Inverted Duty Refund Available Where Inputs And Finished Goods Are Distinct: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Kolkata Bench, has upheld a refund...
Supreme Court

Money Received by Intermediary Not Enough to Prove Public Servant Accepted Bribe: Supreme Court Acquits RPF Officer

The Supreme Court has acquitted a former Divisional Security Commissioner of the Railway Protection...