<?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>2022 (2) TMI 307 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418056</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Assistant Commissioner&#039;s decision to reject the declared value of imported goods, ruling that the valuation based on the LME Bulletin was improper as it compared different goods and was not directly applicable. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding no evidence of under-invoicing and concluding that the declared value was legitimate, leading to the overturning of the Commissioner&#039;s order and granting consequential benefits to the Appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Oct 2022 12:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=669623" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 307 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418056</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Assistant Commissioner&#039;s decision to reject the declared value of imported goods, ruling that the valuation based on the LME Bulletin was improper as it compared different goods and was not directly applicable. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding no evidence of under-invoicing and concluding that the declared value was legitimate, leading to the overturning of the Commissioner&#039;s order and granting consequential benefits to the Appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418056</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>