<?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>2004 (3) TMI 658 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113409</link>
    <description>Misdeclaration of imported goods, including origin and description, justified rejection of invoice value under the Customs (Valuation) Rules, 1988. For goods supported by reliable contemporaneous imports, valuation based on comparable loaded import data was upheld. Market inquiries and deductive valuation for the remaining goods were not accepted because the inquiries were poorly documented and did not reliably establish that identical goods were being compared, so the declared value for that segment was accepted. Confiscation was sustained because of material misdeclaration, while redemption fine and penalties were reduced in view of the partial success on valuation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 12:06:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150415" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 658 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113409</link>
      <description>Misdeclaration of imported goods, including origin and description, justified rejection of invoice value under the Customs (Valuation) Rules, 1988. For goods supported by reliable contemporaneous imports, valuation based on comparable loaded import data was upheld. Market inquiries and deductive valuation for the remaining goods were not accepted because the inquiries were poorly documented and did not reliably establish that identical goods were being compared, so the declared value for that segment was accepted. Confiscation was sustained because of material misdeclaration, while redemption fine and penalties were reduced in view of the partial success on valuation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113409</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>