<?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 (7) TMI 282 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90130</link>
    <description>Related-party status does not by itself justify rejection of declared customs transaction value; the decisive question is whether the relationship influenced price, and absent evidence of mutuality of interest or flow-back, the declared value may stand. Higher prices from small, unrelated imports cannot be used to benchmark large-volume stock-and-sale imports without adjusting for commercial and quantity differences, and a discount linked to the importer&#039;s own selling obligations is not commission or brokerage. A later valuation challenge is not barred merely because an earlier SVB circular was accepted where the subsequent order rests on different facts and a revised shareholding structure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2011 16:55:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127192" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (7) TMI 282 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90130</link>
      <description>Related-party status does not by itself justify rejection of declared customs transaction value; the decisive question is whether the relationship influenced price, and absent evidence of mutuality of interest or flow-back, the declared value may stand. Higher prices from small, unrelated imports cannot be used to benchmark large-volume stock-and-sale imports without adjusting for commercial and quantity differences, and a discount linked to the importer&#039;s own selling obligations is not commission or brokerage. A later valuation challenge is not barred merely because an earlier SVB circular was accepted where the subsequent order rests on different facts and a revised shareholding structure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90130</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>