<?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>2020 (2) TMI 643 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392199</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and confirming that marketing, advertising, sponsorship, and promotional expenses were not includible in the value of the imported goods. The appellant was entitled to a refund of the amount deposited during the investigation, with interest, as the extended period of limitation was not justified, and the penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2020 17:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 643 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392199</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order and confirming that marketing, advertising, sponsorship, and promotional expenses were not includible in the value of the imported goods. The appellant was entitled to a refund of the amount deposited during the investigation, with interest, as the extended period of limitation was not justified, and the penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392199</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>