https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201496 The court allowed the appeal in part, ordering a refund of the amount paid by the respondent for the goods, rather than the market value. The court did not address the issue of reliance on previous case law but focused on the specific facts of the case, determining that the respondent was entitled to the actual value paid for the goods. The court did not delve into the competency of CESTAT to award market price or Mahazar value, as the decision was based on the specific payment made by the respondent for the goods. en-us Fri, 09 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Jan 2011 19:20:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201496 The court allowed the appeal in part, ordering a refund of the amount paid by the respondent for the goods, rather than the market value. The court did not address the issue of reliance on previous case law but focused on the specific facts of the case, determining that the respondent was entitled to the actual value paid for the goods. The court did not delve into the competency of CESTAT to award market price or Mahazar value, as the decision was based on the specific payment made by the respondent for the goods. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 09 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201496