<?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>2003 (5) TMI 450 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109864</link>
    <description>Customs valuation of imported rags requires rejection of the declared transaction value to rest on fresh, concrete material under section 14(1) of the Customs Act and the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. Where remand directions require examination of contemporaneous imports and Bills of Entry produced by the importer, the adjudicating authority must address that evidence. Enhancement of assessable value cannot be sustained when no fresh grounds support discarding the transaction value and the directed evidence remains unexamined. The Revenue&#039;s challenge failed, the impugned order stood upheld, and consequential relief followed for the importer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Apr 2012 14:04:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146880" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (5) TMI 450 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109864</link>
      <description>Customs valuation of imported rags requires rejection of the declared transaction value to rest on fresh, concrete material under section 14(1) of the Customs Act and the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. Where remand directions require examination of contemporaneous imports and Bills of Entry produced by the importer, the adjudicating authority must address that evidence. Enhancement of assessable value cannot be sustained when no fresh grounds support discarding the transaction value and the directed evidence remains unexamined. The Revenue&#039;s challenge failed, the impugned order stood upheld, and consequential relief followed for the importer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109864</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>