https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357556 Design and engineering charges claimed to relate to erection, installation and commissioning were not finally determined for valuation of the imported machine because the adjudicating authority had not properly examined the appellant's detailed factual submissions. The discrepancy between the valuation rule cited in the show cause notice and the rule applied in the adjudication order also required scrutiny, as the legality of inclusion of the charges depended on the governing valuation basis. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration of both the nature of the charges and the applicable valuation provision. en-us Tue, 27 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Mar 2018 18:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357556 Design and engineering charges claimed to relate to erection, installation and commissioning were not finally determined for valuation of the imported machine because the adjudicating authority had not properly examined the appellant's detailed factual submissions. The discrepancy between the valuation rule cited in the show cause notice and the rule applied in the adjudication order also required scrutiny, as the legality of inclusion of the charges depended on the governing valuation basis. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration of both the nature of the charges and the applicable valuation provision. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 27 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357556