<?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>Tribunal Upholds 20% Valuation Enhancement on Imported Goods for 2013-17, Rejects Revenue&#039;s 77% Claim. Appeal Dismissed.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=61462</link>
    <description>Valuation of imported goods - Rejection of transaction value - enhancement of transaction value of imported goods by 20% instead of 77% for the years 2013-14 to 2016-17 - the Tribunal has dealt with the matter in meticulous details and has pointed out substantial basis for its findings that the transaction value shown by the respondent and that of the ASD cannot be treated as comparable at commercial level and quantitative level; and has also pointed out that the promotion activity was undertaken only by the respondent for which, it was earning higher discount. - Revenue appeal dismissed - SC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 15 Jan 2022 11:37:55 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Jan 2022 11:37:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=667293" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tribunal Upholds 20% Valuation Enhancement on Imported Goods for 2013-17, Rejects Revenue&#039;s 77% Claim. Appeal Dismissed.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=61462</link>
      <description>Valuation of imported goods - Rejection of transaction value - enhancement of transaction value of imported goods by 20% instead of 77% for the years 2013-14 to 2016-17 - the Tribunal has dealt with the matter in meticulous details and has pointed out substantial basis for its findings that the transaction value shown by the respondent and that of the ASD cannot be treated as comparable at commercial level and quantitative level; and has also pointed out that the promotion activity was undertaken only by the respondent for which, it was earning higher discount. - Revenue appeal dismissed - SC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 15 Jan 2022 11:37:55 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=61462</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>