<?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>1990 (5) TMI 160 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82109</link>
    <description>Comparable import prices can be used to enhance declared value where the imported aniseeds are shown to be of the same broken quality as the relied-upon consignments. A gap of about four months between the disputed import and the comparable transactions did not, by itself, make the prices unusable, because there was no evidence of a drastic fall in prices. On that basis, the contemporaneous import evidence was accepted for valuation and the enhancement of value was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2011 10:28:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119254" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (5) TMI 160 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82109</link>
      <description>Comparable import prices can be used to enhance declared value where the imported aniseeds are shown to be of the same broken quality as the relied-upon consignments. A gap of about four months between the disputed import and the comparable transactions did not, by itself, make the prices unusable, because there was no evidence of a drastic fall in prices. On that basis, the contemporaneous import evidence was accepted for valuation and the enhancement of value was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 May 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82109</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>