<?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>1994 (1) TMI 135 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83031</link>
    <description>An importer-supplier arrangement was examined for customs valuation where contractual restraints, management controls, disclosure obligations and dual pricing indicated legal and operational control by the foreign supplier. On that basis, the invoice price was treated as not being the sole consideration, so rejection of the invoice value and recourse to the residual valuation method were justified for imports covered by the pre-1988 regime. For imports on or after 16-8-1988, the same agreement and pricing structure were held insufficient to accept the invoice price as true transaction value under the 1988 valuation rules, and the 8.3% loading was treated as reasonable on the facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Jul 2011 11:11:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120176" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (1) TMI 135 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83031</link>
      <description>An importer-supplier arrangement was examined for customs valuation where contractual restraints, management controls, disclosure obligations and dual pricing indicated legal and operational control by the foreign supplier. On that basis, the invoice price was treated as not being the sole consideration, so rejection of the invoice value and recourse to the residual valuation method were justified for imports covered by the pre-1988 regime. For imports on or after 16-8-1988, the same agreement and pricing structure were held insufficient to accept the invoice price as true transaction value under the 1988 valuation rules, and the 8.3% loading was treated as reasonable on the facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83031</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>