<?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>2016 (2) TMI 616 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271911</link>
    <description>Where the declared import value is doubted on corroborative material such as contemporaneous imports, documentary evidence, admissions and supporting records, the transaction value may be rejected and assessable value enhanced under the customs valuation framework. The record also supported confiscation, duty demand, redemption fine and penalties because the goods were misdeclared, imported contrary to advance authorisation conditions, and linked to diversion and undervaluation. The importer&#039;s failure to contest the material or substantiate its objection to examination evidence further weakened the challenge. The result was that rejection of declared value, enhancement of assessable value, and the consequential penalties were sustained in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2016 15:02:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417096" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 616 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271911</link>
      <description>Where the declared import value is doubted on corroborative material such as contemporaneous imports, documentary evidence, admissions and supporting records, the transaction value may be rejected and assessable value enhanced under the customs valuation framework. The record also supported confiscation, duty demand, redemption fine and penalties because the goods were misdeclared, imported contrary to advance authorisation conditions, and linked to diversion and undervaluation. The importer&#039;s failure to contest the material or substantiate its objection to examination evidence further weakened the challenge. The result was that rejection of declared value, enhancement of assessable value, and the consequential penalties were sustained in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271911</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>