<?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>2013 (5) TMI 467 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233882</link>
    <description>Declared transaction value of imported goods may be rejected only where the conditions in the proviso to Rule 3(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 are not met or, after following Rule 12, the proper officer records reasons to doubt the correctness of the declared value. Here, the assessing authority enhanced the unit price of imported motherboards without giving reasons, and the relied-upon contemporaneous import was not a valid comparator because it covered goods classifiable under a different tariff heading. On that material, rejection of the declared value was unsustainable and the enhancement could not be upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2014 10:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=196296" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (5) TMI 467 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233882</link>
      <description>Declared transaction value of imported goods may be rejected only where the conditions in the proviso to Rule 3(2) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 are not met or, after following Rule 12, the proper officer records reasons to doubt the correctness of the declared value. Here, the assessing authority enhanced the unit price of imported motherboards without giving reasons, and the relied-upon contemporaneous import was not a valid comparator because it covered goods classifiable under a different tariff heading. On that material, rejection of the declared value was unsustainable and the enhancement could not be upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233882</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>