<?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 (12) TMI 786 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269482</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal set aside the enhancement of the assessable value of imported goods due to the Revenue&#039;s failure to provide evidence challenging the declared value. However, the tribunal upheld the confiscation of goods but reduced the redemption fine and penalty imposed on the appellant for violating the Foreign Trade Policy. The appeal was disposed of with modifications to the original order, considering the negligible quantity variation and lack of evidence to rebut the declared transaction value.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Dec 2015 20:49:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=409141" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 786 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269482</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal set aside the enhancement of the assessable value of imported goods due to the Revenue&#039;s failure to provide evidence challenging the declared value. However, the tribunal upheld the confiscation of goods but reduced the redemption fine and penalty imposed on the appellant for violating the Foreign Trade Policy. The appeal was disposed of with modifications to the original order, considering the negligible quantity variation and lack of evidence to rebut the declared transaction value.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269482</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>