<?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 (12) TMI 560 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113789</link>
    <description>Declared transaction value in customs matters cannot be rejected without reliable evidence, and any alternative valuation must follow the prescribed comparability rules by reference to identical goods imported at or about the same time. A finding on the year of manufacture must rest on complete and relevant examination material; an unsupported age determination cannot justify confiscation or penalty. Where the record shows contemporaneous import of identical machinery through the same customs station, reliance on a distant prior import is inconsistent with the valuation scheme. The confiscation, enhanced valuation, redemption fine, and penalty were therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 14:26:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150795" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (12) TMI 560 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113789</link>
      <description>Declared transaction value in customs matters cannot be rejected without reliable evidence, and any alternative valuation must follow the prescribed comparability rules by reference to identical goods imported at or about the same time. A finding on the year of manufacture must rest on complete and relevant examination material; an unsupported age determination cannot justify confiscation or penalty. Where the record shows contemporaneous import of identical machinery through the same customs station, reliance on a distant prior import is inconsistent with the valuation scheme. The confiscation, enhanced valuation, redemption fine, and penalty were therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113789</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>