<?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>Customs Authority Misjudged 55% Price Difference in Imported Goods Valuation, Failing to Investigate Sales Promotion Agreements&#039; Impact.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=24991</link>
    <description>Valuation of goods - import from the group companies is covered under Sales Promotion Agreements. - adjudicating authority simply considered the difference in price, which he states wrongly to be 55%, without examining the reasons for the price difference in proper prospective. - No demand - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2015 17:47:25 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2015 17:47:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=399130" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Customs Authority Misjudged 55% Price Difference in Imported Goods Valuation, Failing to Investigate Sales Promotion Agreements&#039; Impact.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=24991</link>
      <description>Valuation of goods - import from the group companies is covered under Sales Promotion Agreements. - adjudicating authority simply considered the difference in price, which he states wrongly to be 55%, without examining the reasons for the price difference in proper prospective. - No demand - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2015 17:47:25 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=24991</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>