https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325035 The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision, rejecting the appellant's appeal concerning the assessment of imported Ceramic tiles. The burden of proof on valuation was placed on the appellant, whose contract was deemed unreliable due to discrepancies. The authorities justified using contemporaneous import data for valuation, leading to the rejection of the appellant's arguments based on legal precedents. The Tribunal found Rule 10A of the Valuation Rules applicable, allowing valuation based on loaded prices if declared values are doubted. en-us Thu, 08 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Mar 2016 18:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325035 The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision, rejecting the appellant's appeal concerning the assessment of imported Ceramic tiles. The burden of proof on valuation was placed on the appellant, whose contract was deemed unreliable due to discrepancies. The authorities justified using contemporaneous import data for valuation, leading to the rejection of the appellant's arguments based on legal precedents. The Tribunal found Rule 10A of the Valuation Rules applicable, allowing valuation based on loaded prices if declared values are doubted. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 08 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325035