<?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>1999 (11) TMI 220 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92794</link>
    <description>Rule 10A of the Customs Valuation Rules could not be applied retrospectively to imports made before its insertion, so the declared transaction value could not be discarded on that basis. PLATT&#039;s price report, being only a compilation of price ranges and not evidence of actual contemporaneous transactions, was not a reliable ground for enhancing assessable value. Informal local quotations between Indian offices also did not establish contemporaneous imports or justify departure from the declared value. Once valuation enhancement failed, the duty demand under section 28 and the penalty under section 114A had no basis and were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Nov 2011 11:29:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129855" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (11) TMI 220 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92794</link>
      <description>Rule 10A of the Customs Valuation Rules could not be applied retrospectively to imports made before its insertion, so the declared transaction value could not be discarded on that basis. PLATT&#039;s price report, being only a compilation of price ranges and not evidence of actual contemporaneous transactions, was not a reliable ground for enhancing assessable value. Informal local quotations between Indian offices also did not establish contemporaneous imports or justify departure from the declared value. Once valuation enhancement failed, the duty demand under section 28 and the penalty under section 114A had no basis and were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92794</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>