<?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>2006 (2) TMI 321 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117271</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed, setting aside the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the valuation of imported goods. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering the actual transaction value and the application of Rule 4(2) of the Valuation Rules in determining duty liability for imported goods, especially in cases involving discounts passed on from the manufacturer to the importer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2012 14:35:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154268" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 321 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117271</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed, setting aside the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the valuation of imported goods. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering the actual transaction value and the application of Rule 4(2) of the Valuation Rules in determining duty liability for imported goods, especially in cases involving discounts passed on from the manufacturer to the importer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117271</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>