<?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 (7) TMI 697 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107327</link>
    <description>Declared transaction value for imported soap may be rejected when contemporaneous import data and comparable supplier invoices support a higher assessable value. The comparison with an earlier invoice from the same overseas supplier, together with bill of entry particulars for similar imports and comparable soaps from China, was treated as reliable evidence of value. The importer&#039;s explanation that the earlier invoice was about one year old, and the absence of any written contract or credible contemporaneous proof of the lower price, were insufficient to rebut that evidence. On that basis, the enhancement of assessable value was upheld and the appeal was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2012 16:15:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144344" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (7) TMI 697 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107327</link>
      <description>Declared transaction value for imported soap may be rejected when contemporaneous import data and comparable supplier invoices support a higher assessable value. The comparison with an earlier invoice from the same overseas supplier, together with bill of entry particulars for similar imports and comparable soaps from China, was treated as reliable evidence of value. The importer&#039;s explanation that the earlier invoice was about one year old, and the absence of any written contract or credible contemporaneous proof of the lower price, were insufficient to rebut that evidence. On that basis, the enhancement of assessable value was upheld and the appeal was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107327</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>