<?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>1998 (9) TMI 226 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89600</link>
    <description>Imported near-complete CAT scan systems assembled through a modular process, with specialised testing and an essential indigenous power converter, were treated as parts for exemption purposes because the notification and interpretative rule had to be read harmoniously. The benefit of Notification No. 66/88-Cus. was therefore available. On valuation, the declared transaction value could not be rejected because the department relied on an exporter&#039;s price list for a fully assembled and calibrated system, not contemporaneous comparable imports, and showed no fraud, special relationship, or other basis to discredit the declared value. The reassessment was not sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 13:26:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126662" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (9) TMI 226 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89600</link>
      <description>Imported near-complete CAT scan systems assembled through a modular process, with specialised testing and an essential indigenous power converter, were treated as parts for exemption purposes because the notification and interpretative rule had to be read harmoniously. The benefit of Notification No. 66/88-Cus. was therefore available. On valuation, the declared transaction value could not be rejected because the department relied on an exporter&#039;s price list for a fully assembled and calibrated system, not contemporaneous comparable imports, and showed no fraud, special relationship, or other basis to discredit the declared value. The reassessment was not sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89600</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>