<?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>2017 (11) TMI 1439 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351560</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the original order in a case concerning the classification and valuation of imported goods. The dispute centered on the correct classification of an External VGA Box, with the appellant advocating for Chapter 8473 and the Revenue arguing for Chapter 8529. The Tribunal ruled in favor of Chapter 8473, considering the specific use of the goods with computer monitors. Regarding valuation, the Tribunal disagreed with the authority&#039;s reassessment based on a previous import&#039;s value, citing lack of justification. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, providing relief to the appellant due to the specific nature of the goods and the unjustified valuation decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2017 07:37:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=497827" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 1439 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351560</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the original order in a case concerning the classification and valuation of imported goods. The dispute centered on the correct classification of an External VGA Box, with the appellant advocating for Chapter 8473 and the Revenue arguing for Chapter 8529. The Tribunal ruled in favor of Chapter 8473, considering the specific use of the goods with computer monitors. Regarding valuation, the Tribunal disagreed with the authority&#039;s reassessment based on a previous import&#039;s value, citing lack of justification. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, providing relief to the appellant due to the specific nature of the goods and the unjustified valuation decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351560</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>