https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84562 Declared import value could not be rejected merely because the foreign supplier was a subsidiary of another overseas company and the importer acted as its Indian representative; no statutory basis or proof of related-person status was shown. The department also could not re-determine assessable value by using invoices from two years earlier and foreign comparables from another country, because valuation rules require contemporaneous comparable imports and proper adjustments for commercial level and quantity. In the absence of cogent evidence of undervaluation, the value enhancement, confiscation-related consequences, duty demand, and penalties were unsustainable. en-us Tue, 10 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Jul 2011 17:27:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84562 Declared import value could not be rejected merely because the foreign supplier was a subsidiary of another overseas company and the importer acted as its Indian representative; no statutory basis or proof of related-person status was shown. The department also could not re-determine assessable value by using invoices from two years earlier and foreign comparables from another country, because valuation rules require contemporaneous comparable imports and proper adjustments for commercial level and quantity. In the absence of cogent evidence of undervaluation, the value enhancement, confiscation-related consequences, duty demand, and penalties were unsustainable. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 10 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84562