<?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>2012 (5) TMI 571 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170191</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s appeals concerning the assessment of goods based on transaction value. The Tribunal found that the Revenue failed to provide sufficient evidence for rejecting the transaction value and supporting the increased value. It was emphasized that the value of substandard goods is subject to market forces, leading to substantial variations. The Tribunal also disagreed with the Revenue&#039;s assertion that transaction value should be routinely rejected for substandard items, highlighting the influence of market forces on the value of such goods and the lack of supporting evidence from the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 May 2015 15:30:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=385409" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (5) TMI 571 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170191</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s appeals concerning the assessment of goods based on transaction value. The Tribunal found that the Revenue failed to provide sufficient evidence for rejecting the transaction value and supporting the increased value. It was emphasized that the value of substandard goods is subject to market forces, leading to substantial variations. The Tribunal also disagreed with the Revenue&#039;s assertion that transaction value should be routinely rejected for substandard items, highlighting the influence of market forces on the value of such goods and the lack of supporting evidence from the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170191</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>