<?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 (4) TMI 462 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121560</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal rejected the appeal challenging the valuation order on imported goods declared as &quot;re-melted lead ingots.&quot; The dispute centered on the deduction allowed on the London Metal Exchange price, with the appellant seeking a 15% discount, which was denied. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of adhering to transaction value for valuation purposes, criticizing the assessing authority&#039;s reliance on LME price without sufficient legal basis. The appeal was dismissed due to the lack of justification for deviating from standard valuation practices, leading to the rejection of the revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2012 15:49:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158554" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (4) TMI 462 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121560</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal rejected the appeal challenging the valuation order on imported goods declared as &quot;re-melted lead ingots.&quot; The dispute centered on the deduction allowed on the London Metal Exchange price, with the appellant seeking a 15% discount, which was denied. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of adhering to transaction value for valuation purposes, criticizing the assessing authority&#039;s reliance on LME price without sufficient legal basis. The appeal was dismissed due to the lack of justification for deviating from standard valuation practices, leading to the rejection of the revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121560</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>