<?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>1992 (6) TMI 134 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82018</link>
    <description>Customs valuation under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 must follow the 1988 Valuation Rules, and transaction value can be displaced only on legally sustainable grounds. A declared import value was rejected mainly by comparing it with another import, but the record did not show a reasoned examination of comparable imports, the identity of the goods, differences in attachments, or whether the imports were truly contemporaneous. The adjudication order also failed to deal properly with the relevant documents or give adequate reasons on the material valuation factors. On that reasoning, the rejection of the declared value could not be sustained and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011 13:31:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119163" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (6) TMI 134 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82018</link>
      <description>Customs valuation under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 must follow the 1988 Valuation Rules, and transaction value can be displaced only on legally sustainable grounds. A declared import value was rejected mainly by comparing it with another import, but the record did not show a reasoned examination of comparable imports, the identity of the goods, differences in attachments, or whether the imports were truly contemporaneous. The adjudication order also failed to deal properly with the relevant documents or give adequate reasons on the material valuation factors. On that reasoning, the rejection of the declared value could not be sustained and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82018</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>