<?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>2011 (3) TMI 266 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204069</link>
    <description>Declared import value cannot be rejected and enhanced on the basis of contemporaneous import data that was not included in the show-cause notice, because the Revenue may not travel beyond the notice&#039;s scope. The importer&#039;s declared assessable value was supported by the purchase order, letter of credit, and other contemporaneous documents, and prior imports of identical goods from the same supplier at the same value had been accepted by the same Customs House. The enhancement also failed because the contemporaneous reference was incorrectly compared in euro rather than US dollar terms, which distorted valuation. The order accepting the declared assessable value was therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 18:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177614" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 266 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204069</link>
      <description>Declared import value cannot be rejected and enhanced on the basis of contemporaneous import data that was not included in the show-cause notice, because the Revenue may not travel beyond the notice&#039;s scope. The importer&#039;s declared assessable value was supported by the purchase order, letter of credit, and other contemporaneous documents, and prior imports of identical goods from the same supplier at the same value had been accepted by the same Customs House. The enhancement also failed because the contemporaneous reference was incorrectly compared in euro rather than US dollar terms, which distorted valuation. The order accepting the declared assessable value was therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204069</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>