https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369970 Rectification of a customs valuation order was held maintainable because the period spent prosecuting a civil appeal before the Supreme Court was excluded for limitation purposes. The valuation was also found to require reconsideration since contemporaneous import data, including a comparable importer's accepted price, had not been properly examined and no proper finding was recorded under Rule 5(3) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The difference in quantity between the compared imports was treated as a material valuation factor. The rectification applications were allowed and the valuation dispute was remanded for fresh consideration, with all issues kept open. en-us Thu, 01 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Feb 2020 11:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369970 Rectification of a customs valuation order was held maintainable because the period spent prosecuting a civil appeal before the Supreme Court was excluded for limitation purposes. The valuation was also found to require reconsideration since contemporaneous import data, including a comparable importer's accepted price, had not been properly examined and no proper finding was recorded under Rule 5(3) of the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988. The difference in quantity between the compared imports was treated as a material valuation factor. The rectification applications were allowed and the valuation dispute was remanded for fresh consideration, with all issues kept open. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 01 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369970