<?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 (4) TMI 909 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210145</link>
    <description>When assessable value of imported machinery is enhanced on the basis of related-party technology and engineering agreements, the authority must consider the importer&#039;s explanations and supporting material, determine whether any royalty or other payments have the required nexus with the imported goods or are a condition of sale, and follow natural justice before confirming valuation. The proceedings were held unsustainable because the importer&#039;s clarifications on royalty, transfer pricing, comparative prices, and engineering services were not meaningfully examined, and relevant submissions were not supplied or addressed. The impugned orders were set aside and the valuation issue was remanded for fresh decision after hearing the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2012 12:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183581" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 909 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210145</link>
      <description>When assessable value of imported machinery is enhanced on the basis of related-party technology and engineering agreements, the authority must consider the importer&#039;s explanations and supporting material, determine whether any royalty or other payments have the required nexus with the imported goods or are a condition of sale, and follow natural justice before confirming valuation. The proceedings were held unsustainable because the importer&#039;s clarifications on royalty, transfer pricing, comparative prices, and engineering services were not meaningfully examined, and relevant submissions were not supplied or addressed. The impugned orders were set aside and the valuation issue was remanded for fresh decision after hearing the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210145</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>