<?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>1996 (5) TMI 273 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88201</link>
    <description>For air-imported goods, assessable value was to be determined under the then-applicable Customs Appraising Manual instructions, which treated air imports differently from ordinary sea imports and contemplated use of freight and other charges ordinarily paid for similar goods unless reliable evidence showed another basis. Because the record was incomplete and the relevant invoice and value particulars were not produced, the refund claim could not be finally adjudicated on the existing material. The appellant was required to place the necessary documents before the jurisdictional authority, and the refund claim was remitted for fresh disposal in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:51:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125267" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (5) TMI 273 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88201</link>
      <description>For air-imported goods, assessable value was to be determined under the then-applicable Customs Appraising Manual instructions, which treated air imports differently from ordinary sea imports and contemplated use of freight and other charges ordinarily paid for similar goods unless reliable evidence showed another basis. Because the record was incomplete and the relevant invoice and value particulars were not produced, the refund claim could not be finally adjudicated on the existing material. The appellant was required to place the necessary documents before the jurisdictional authority, and the refund claim was remitted for fresh disposal in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88201</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>