https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201883 Where the buyer and supplier were related and that relationship influenced the import price, the declared transaction value was rightly rejected as unacceptable. With the valuation methods under Rules 4 to 7A unavailable, the goods were correctly assessed under the residual method in Rule 8 on the basis of available material. The challenge to enhanced valuation under Rule 8(2)(iii) failed in view of the importer's own statement. The understated value justified confiscation for misdeclaration, and the duty demand, interest, and penalties under Sections 114A and 112(a) were upheld. en-us Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Jan 2011 19:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201883 Where the buyer and supplier were related and that relationship influenced the import price, the declared transaction value was rightly rejected as unacceptable. With the valuation methods under Rules 4 to 7A unavailable, the goods were correctly assessed under the residual method in Rule 8 on the basis of available material. The challenge to enhanced valuation under Rule 8(2)(iii) failed in view of the importer's own statement. The understated value justified confiscation for misdeclaration, and the duty demand, interest, and penalties under Sections 114A and 112(a) were upheld. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201883