<?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>2014 (1) TMI 64 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241839</link>
    <description>The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the enhancement of value on the assessed Bill of Entry, stating that the assessing authority did not provide reasons for rejecting the transaction value or for the enhancement. The Commissioner relied on previous decisions and held that the enhancement was not justified. Importer&#039;s payment of duty without protest and voluntary clearance of goods did not preclude them from challenging the assessed Bill of Entry. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s argument that accepting the enhanced value by clearing the goods barred the importer from appealing. The appeal filed by the Revenue was rejected, upholding the decision of the appellate authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jan 2014 08:17:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=341503" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 64 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241839</link>
      <description>The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the enhancement of value on the assessed Bill of Entry, stating that the assessing authority did not provide reasons for rejecting the transaction value or for the enhancement. The Commissioner relied on previous decisions and held that the enhancement was not justified. Importer&#039;s payment of duty without protest and voluntary clearance of goods did not preclude them from challenging the assessed Bill of Entry. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s argument that accepting the enhanced value by clearing the goods barred the importer from appealing. The appeal filed by the Revenue was rejected, upholding the decision of the appellate authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241839</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>