<?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 (12) TMI 1365 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336720</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision regarding the acceptance of invoice value for imports without invoking Rule 3(3)(b)(i) of the Customs Valuation Rules. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner had thoroughly reviewed the agreement between the importer and the related supplier and other relevant documents, concluding that the relationship did not influence the invoice value. The Tribunal emphasized the need to reject transaction value with reasons before determining a new value under the Customs Valuation Rules. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the impugned order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2016 22:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453161" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1365 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336720</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision regarding the acceptance of invoice value for imports without invoking Rule 3(3)(b)(i) of the Customs Valuation Rules. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner had thoroughly reviewed the agreement between the importer and the related supplier and other relevant documents, concluding that the relationship did not influence the invoice value. The Tribunal emphasized the need to reject transaction value with reasons before determining a new value under the Customs Valuation Rules. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the impugned order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336720</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>