https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340512 Declared transaction value could not be rejected merely because the manufacturer's invoice was not produced; rejection under Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 required adequate reasons supported by the record. Contemporaneous import data also could not justify re-determination unless comparability was properly analysed on quality, quantity, timing and other relevant factors, especially where the goods were treated as branded. As the impugned valuation order repeated a cryptic approach and failed to address these requirements, the valuation findings were not sustainable on the record. The matter was remanded to the original authority for fresh decision after considering all issues and affording the appellant due opportunity. en-us Thu, 09 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Mar 2017 08:17:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340512 Declared transaction value could not be rejected merely because the manufacturer's invoice was not produced; rejection under Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007 required adequate reasons supported by the record. Contemporaneous import data also could not justify re-determination unless comparability was properly analysed on quality, quantity, timing and other relevant factors, especially where the goods were treated as branded. As the impugned valuation order repeated a cryptic approach and failed to address these requirements, the valuation findings were not sustainable on the record. The matter was remanded to the original authority for fresh decision after considering all issues and affording the appellant due opportunity. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 09 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340512