<?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 (3) TMI 640 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419602</link>
    <description>Imported used rails and heavy melting scrap were held, on the stated analysis, to fall under Chapter Heading 7204 rather than 7302 because the department did not produce independent evidence to support the rival classification and could not rely on a circular alone. The declared transaction value was accepted because rejection under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 required cogent evidence and the valuation sequence under the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 was not properly satisfied; an unlinked invoice and inconclusive investigation were insufficient to justify enhancement. Interest for the period before assessment was also found unsustainable because the goods were not warehoused and duty became payable only on assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2022 10:17:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=673014" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 640 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419602</link>
      <description>Imported used rails and heavy melting scrap were held, on the stated analysis, to fall under Chapter Heading 7204 rather than 7302 because the department did not produce independent evidence to support the rival classification and could not rely on a circular alone. The declared transaction value was accepted because rejection under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 required cogent evidence and the valuation sequence under the Customs Valuation Rules, 1988 was not properly satisfied; an unlinked invoice and inconclusive investigation were insufficient to justify enhancement. Interest for the period before assessment was also found unsustainable because the goods were not warehoused and duty became payable only on assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419602</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>