<?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>2002 (2) TMI 535 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101402</link>
    <description>Customs valuation under the 1988 Rules required recourse to Rules 4, 5 and 6 before moving to Rule 7 and, where applicable, Rule 7A. The tribunal treated the remand as limited to allowing the importer to exercise the statutory option under Rule 6A to proceed under Rule 7 or Rule 7A with Proper Officer approval. The earlier factual and legal findings were left undisturbed, and the remaining conclusions were confirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:27:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138452" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (2) TMI 535 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101402</link>
      <description>Customs valuation under the 1988 Rules required recourse to Rules 4, 5 and 6 before moving to Rule 7 and, where applicable, Rule 7A. The tribunal treated the remand as limited to allowing the importer to exercise the statutory option under Rule 6A to proceed under Rule 7 or Rule 7A with Proper Officer approval. The earlier factual and legal findings were left undisturbed, and the remaining conclusions were confirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101402</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>