<?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>2006 (12) TMI 575 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298190</link>
    <description>Enhanced customs valuation based on contemporaneous imports could not be sustained where the importer was not supplied the relied-upon bills of entry, because effective rebuttal of comparable imports is part of fair adjudication. The findings of misdeclaration and confiscability of the imported tin sheets/coils and TFSSD were otherwise supported by the managing partner&#039;s statement, laboratory evidence, and surrounding circumstances. Since duty, interest, fine and penalties depended on the valuation exercise, the defective assessment vitiated the adjudication in part and required fresh decision-making after disclosure of the material and a further opportunity of hearing. The matter was therefore remanded for reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2021 11:57:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=658902" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 575 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298190</link>
      <description>Enhanced customs valuation based on contemporaneous imports could not be sustained where the importer was not supplied the relied-upon bills of entry, because effective rebuttal of comparable imports is part of fair adjudication. The findings of misdeclaration and confiscability of the imported tin sheets/coils and TFSSD were otherwise supported by the managing partner&#039;s statement, laboratory evidence, and surrounding circumstances. Since duty, interest, fine and penalties depended on the valuation exercise, the defective assessment vitiated the adjudication in part and required fresh decision-making after disclosure of the material and a further opportunity of hearing. The matter was therefore remanded for reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298190</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>