<?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 (3) TMI 458 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245005</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order that enhanced the value of imported Ball Bearings. It found that the rejection of the declared transaction value was unjustified as the authorities did not follow Rule 12 of the Customs (Valuation) Rules, 2007. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of adhering to proper procedures and considering factors like contemporaneous imports in determining the value of imported goods.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Mar 2014 14:48:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348729" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 458 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245005</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order that enhanced the value of imported Ball Bearings. It found that the rejection of the declared transaction value was unjustified as the authorities did not follow Rule 12 of the Customs (Valuation) Rules, 2007. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of adhering to proper procedures and considering factors like contemporaneous imports in determining the value of imported goods.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245005</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>