<?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>2007 (3) TMI 495 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121263</link>
    <description>Contemporaneous Customs examination and acceptance of the consignments supported the declared description of imported glass chatons as stock lots, and the Revenue&#039;s contrary reliance on statements and surrounding circumstances was insufficient to displace that evidence. For valuation, the assessee&#039;s disclosed year-wise values, treated as based on records consulted, could be used to redetermine assessable value under the residuary framework, while a supplier&#039;s prime-quality price list and any weighted-average method not found in the valuation rules could not replace the statutory basis. Penalty on the importing firm remained sustainable once under-valuation was upheld, but separate penalties on individual noticees were considered unnecessary in the circumstances.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:56:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158257" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (3) TMI 495 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121263</link>
      <description>Contemporaneous Customs examination and acceptance of the consignments supported the declared description of imported glass chatons as stock lots, and the Revenue&#039;s contrary reliance on statements and surrounding circumstances was insufficient to displace that evidence. For valuation, the assessee&#039;s disclosed year-wise values, treated as based on records consulted, could be used to redetermine assessable value under the residuary framework, while a supplier&#039;s prime-quality price list and any weighted-average method not found in the valuation rules could not replace the statutory basis. Penalty on the importing firm remained sustainable once under-valuation was upheld, but separate penalties on individual noticees were considered unnecessary in the circumstances.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121263</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>