<?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>2015 (4) TMI 112 - CESTAT NEW DELHI (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258230</link>
    <description>For old and used photocopier machines, declared transaction value under customs valuation could not be rejected merely on Chartered Engineer certificates or NIDB data where there was no evidence of related-party dealings, extra consideration, or other tangible grounds under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The valuation of obsolete second-hand machinery must be tested on age, condition, and marketability, not generalized comparable data alone. In contrast, import of restricted photocopiers without the required licence justified confiscation, but redemption fine and penalty had to be fixed on the facts and supporting evidence; absent proof of higher profit margin, the higher adjudicated amounts were reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2016 10:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=380395" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 112 - CESTAT NEW DELHI (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258230</link>
      <description>For old and used photocopier machines, declared transaction value under customs valuation could not be rejected merely on Chartered Engineer certificates or NIDB data where there was no evidence of related-party dealings, extra consideration, or other tangible grounds under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The valuation of obsolete second-hand machinery must be tested on age, condition, and marketability, not generalized comparable data alone. In contrast, import of restricted photocopiers without the required licence justified confiscation, but redemption fine and penalty had to be fixed on the facts and supporting evidence; absent proof of higher profit margin, the higher adjudicated amounts were reduced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258230</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>