<?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>2005 (7) TMI 426 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115586</link>
    <description>Where imported technical literature and drawings formed part of a composite technology-collaboration arrangement, their assessable value could be determined by a reasonable apportionment of the overall consideration rather than excluding them entirely from customs valuation. The unimplemented 14&quot; picture-tube collaboration did not separately carry a stipulated price, and the imported volumes were not independently saleable goods, so duty was confined to the apportioned value of the drawings. On penalty, the prior finding of liability had attained finality, but the amount was considered excessive on the facts and was reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 12:30:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152585" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 426 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115586</link>
      <description>Where imported technical literature and drawings formed part of a composite technology-collaboration arrangement, their assessable value could be determined by a reasonable apportionment of the overall consideration rather than excluding them entirely from customs valuation. The unimplemented 14&quot; picture-tube collaboration did not separately carry a stipulated price, and the imported volumes were not independently saleable goods, so duty was confined to the apportioned value of the drawings. On penalty, the prior finding of liability had attained finality, but the amount was considered excessive on the facts and was reduced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115586</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>