<?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>2009 (3) TMI 808 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126256</link>
    <description>Customs valuation under Section 14 of the Customs Act permits rejection of the declared transaction value only where buyer and seller have mutual interest in each other&#039;s business and the price is not the sole consideration. The foreign supplier&#039;s shareholding in the Indian joint venture, nominee directors, and transfer of technical know-how did not by itself prove reciprocal interest by the Indian importer in the supplier&#039;s business. In the absence of evidence of shareholding, board control, or other controlling interest on the importer&#039;s side, mere one-way commercial or managerial influence was insufficient. The declared transaction value therefore could not be rejected on the ground that the parties were related persons.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Jul 2017 09:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163153" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 808 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126256</link>
      <description>Customs valuation under Section 14 of the Customs Act permits rejection of the declared transaction value only where buyer and seller have mutual interest in each other&#039;s business and the price is not the sole consideration. The foreign supplier&#039;s shareholding in the Indian joint venture, nominee directors, and transfer of technical know-how did not by itself prove reciprocal interest by the Indian importer in the supplier&#039;s business. In the absence of evidence of shareholding, board control, or other controlling interest on the importer&#039;s side, mere one-way commercial or managerial influence was insufficient. The declared transaction value therefore could not be rejected on the ground that the parties were related persons.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126256</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>