<?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 389 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92040</link>
    <description>In a customs valuation dispute, the tribunal considered whether the assessee should receive full waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty pending appeal. The demand was prima facie debatable because the declared price was alleged not to include all elements of consideration, yet the use of the related buyer&#039;s wholesale price as assessable value was not shown to be legally justified without allowing deductions for profit margin, establishment charges and marketing expenses. Full waiver was refused because the assessee did not establish entitlement to complete dispensation, but financial hardship and an existing bank guarantee supported relief. The assessee was directed to deposit Rs. 50 lakhs, and the balance pre-deposit of duty and penalty was waived on that condition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2011 11:57:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129101" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (7) TMI 389 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92040</link>
      <description>In a customs valuation dispute, the tribunal considered whether the assessee should receive full waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty pending appeal. The demand was prima facie debatable because the declared price was alleged not to include all elements of consideration, yet the use of the related buyer&#039;s wholesale price as assessable value was not shown to be legally justified without allowing deductions for profit margin, establishment charges and marketing expenses. Full waiver was refused because the assessee did not establish entitlement to complete dispensation, but financial hardship and an existing bank guarantee supported relief. The assessee was directed to deposit Rs. 50 lakhs, and the balance pre-deposit of duty and penalty was waived on that condition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92040</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>