TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the declared transaction value in related-party imports could be rejected for non-invocation of Rule 3(3)(b)(i) of the Customs Valuation Rules and whether the Revenue could re-agitate a valuation issue already accepted in earlier proceedings.
Analysis: The impugned order recorded that the foreign supplier had supplied identical or similar goods to unrelated buyers in India and that the declared prices were examined against those comparable sales. It further found that the relationship between the importer and the foreign supplier had not influenced the price and that the Department had not shown any other reason to reject the transaction value. Once the earlier finding on valuation had been accepted and had attained finality, the same issue could not be reopened in the present appeal. The order also noted that transaction value cannot be re-determined unless it is first rejected on recorded reasons, after which the valuation rules may be applied.
Conclusion: The declared invoice value was rightly accepted and the Revenue's challenge to revaluation failed.
Final Conclusion: The valuation dispute was resolved in favour of acceptance of the imported goods' declared value, and the Revenue's appeal did not survive.
Ratio Decidendi: In related-party imports, transaction value cannot be discarded unless the Department first records sustainable reasons for rejection, and a valuation issue that has already attained finality cannot be reopened in a later appeal without a fresh legal basis.
TaxTMI 
