<?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 (7) TMI 623 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110498</link>
    <description>Declared transaction value of imported goods cannot be rejected merely because similar goods entered through other customs stations at higher prices. The valuation scheme requires acceptance of the transaction value unless it is shown to be unreliable on recognised grounds, and commercial factors such as quantity and market conditions may explain price variation. Where the importer&#039;s contract price is supported by supplier documents and no valid basis exists to discard it, confiscation and penalty based on rejection of value also fail. On the facts noted, the higher comparable prices did not justify treating the declared price as non-commercial, so the declared value was wrongly rejected and consequential penal action was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 11:44:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147514" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 623 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110498</link>
      <description>Declared transaction value of imported goods cannot be rejected merely because similar goods entered through other customs stations at higher prices. The valuation scheme requires acceptance of the transaction value unless it is shown to be unreliable on recognised grounds, and commercial factors such as quantity and market conditions may explain price variation. Where the importer&#039;s contract price is supported by supplier documents and no valid basis exists to discard it, confiscation and penalty based on rejection of value also fail. On the facts noted, the higher comparable prices did not justify treating the declared price as non-commercial, so the declared value was wrongly rejected and consequential penal action was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110498</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>