<?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>2001 (7) TMI 962 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102239</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the adjudicator&#039;s order. It concluded that the imported machines were not identical, the relationship did not influence the price, the valuation process under Rule 5 was incorrect, and the penalties under Sections 112 and 114A of the Customs Act, 1962, were not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 11:50:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139288" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (7) TMI 962 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102239</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the adjudicator&#039;s order. It concluded that the imported machines were not identical, the relationship did not influence the price, the valuation process under Rule 5 was incorrect, and the penalties under Sections 112 and 114A of the Customs Act, 1962, were not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102239</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>