<?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>1995 (10) TMI 93 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84478</link>
    <description>Customs valuation of imported goods required adjustment of comparable prices for separately identifiable credit interest, bulk quantity discount, and freight concessions. The text states that the declared invoice price was not inclusive of 180-day credit interest, so that element had to be excluded for comparison. It further treats quantity discount on bulk imports as a normal trade practice and indicates a 2.5% discount on the bulk purchase. On freight, it accepts deduction of the difference for chartered vessel freight even where freight was not separately shown in the invoice, based on supporting market evidence. The declared value was therefore accepted after these adjustments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 11:57:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121622" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (10) TMI 93 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84478</link>
      <description>Customs valuation of imported goods required adjustment of comparable prices for separately identifiable credit interest, bulk quantity discount, and freight concessions. The text states that the declared invoice price was not inclusive of 180-day credit interest, so that element had to be excluded for comparison. It further treats quantity discount on bulk imports as a normal trade practice and indicates a 2.5% discount on the bulk purchase. On freight, it accepts deduction of the difference for chartered vessel freight even where freight was not separately shown in the invoice, based on supporting market evidence. The declared value was therefore accepted after these adjustments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84478</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>