<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (3) TMI 391 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75474</link>
    <description>Goods cleared into the domestic tariff area as rejects were found to be prime quality fabrics, as they were not stamped or certified as rejects and were sold in the market as regular goods; the reject benefit was therefore unavailable and the duty demand was sustainable. The declared sale price to a related buyer was not accepted as the true transaction value because it rested on that false premise; valuation had to follow the sequential customs valuation framework under the deductive method, with proper deductions for expenses, profit, transport, insurance, and taxes. The extended period of limitation and penalty provisions were held applicable, subject to fresh quantification on the corrected valuation basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113739" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 391 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75474</link>
      <description>Goods cleared into the domestic tariff area as rejects were found to be prime quality fabrics, as they were not stamped or certified as rejects and were sold in the market as regular goods; the reject benefit was therefore unavailable and the duty demand was sustainable. The declared sale price to a related buyer was not accepted as the true transaction value because it rested on that false premise; valuation had to follow the sequential customs valuation framework under the deductive method, with proper deductions for expenses, profit, transport, insurance, and taxes. The extended period of limitation and penalty provisions were held applicable, subject to fresh quantification on the corrected valuation basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75474</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>