<?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>2008 (2) TMI 111 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4502</link>
    <description>The assessable value of imported consignments was enhanced after the importer, closely related to the foreign supplier and acting as its indenting agent, failed to justify a lower declared price against comparable imports. The earlier Special Valuation Branch acceptance of transaction value did not bar further scrutiny, because that order expressly allowed review on receipt of additional information. Given the relationship between the parties and the absence of a satisfactory commercial explanation for the price difference, the authorities were justified in drawing an adverse inference and adopting the higher comparable value. The re-assessment was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43844" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 111 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4502</link>
      <description>The assessable value of imported consignments was enhanced after the importer, closely related to the foreign supplier and acting as its indenting agent, failed to justify a lower declared price against comparable imports. The earlier Special Valuation Branch acceptance of transaction value did not bar further scrutiny, because that order expressly allowed review on receipt of additional information. Given the relationship between the parties and the absence of a satisfactory commercial explanation for the price difference, the authorities were justified in drawing an adverse inference and adopting the higher comparable value. The re-assessment was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4502</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>