https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338195 Declared transaction value may be rejected where the importer fails to substantiate it with cogent evidence and surrounding facts indicate a front-entity or benami routing of the import. On the record, the real importer was identified during investigation, the appellant-firm did not cooperate with summons, and no documentary proof supported the declared value as the true transaction value. In those circumstances, the customs authorities were justified in determining assessable value under Rule 7 read with Rule 10A of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The rejection of the declared value and the revised valuation were therefore upheld, and the appeal failed. en-us Thu, 27 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Jan 2017 07:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338195 Declared transaction value may be rejected where the importer fails to substantiate it with cogent evidence and surrounding facts indicate a front-entity or benami routing of the import. On the record, the real importer was identified during investigation, the appellant-firm did not cooperate with summons, and no documentary proof supported the declared value as the true transaction value. In those circumstances, the customs authorities were justified in determining assessable value under Rule 7 read with Rule 10A of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The rejection of the declared value and the revised valuation were therefore upheld, and the appeal failed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 27 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338195