<?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>2010 (9) TMI 375 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202549</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court upheld the Commissioner of Customs&#039; decision regarding undervaluation of imported goods, specifically imported computers, dismissing the appellant&#039;s challenge. The Court found that the declared values were not reflective of the true transactional value, as the appellant and supplier were related, and the declared prices aimed to evade customs duty. Relying on the principle that deemed value prevails when actual selling prices are not accurately reflected, the Court concluded that the higher deemed value took precedence over the lower transactional value, ultimately dismissing the appeal for lack of merit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 17:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176128" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 375 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202549</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court upheld the Commissioner of Customs&#039; decision regarding undervaluation of imported goods, specifically imported computers, dismissing the appellant&#039;s challenge. The Court found that the declared values were not reflective of the true transactional value, as the appellant and supplier were related, and the declared prices aimed to evade customs duty. Relying on the principle that deemed value prevails when actual selling prices are not accurately reflected, the Court concluded that the higher deemed value took precedence over the lower transactional value, ultimately dismissing the appeal for lack of merit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202549</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>