<?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>2007 (2) TMI 217 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31642</link>
    <description>Valuation of a vessel was sustained on the basis of the original memorandum of agreement because the later claimed reduced price was not supported by a reliable basis and was inconsistent with the first agreement. Duty on bunkers and oil on board was upheld because the survey showed usable bunkers and fresh water, and the exemption was limited to bunkers and oils contained in the engines without proof that the goods qualified. Exemption for durable foodstuff was also denied for want of material to disturb the finding based on precedent. The appeal failed on the substantive issues, while the question of landing charges was remanded for reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70288" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 217 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31642</link>
      <description>Valuation of a vessel was sustained on the basis of the original memorandum of agreement because the later claimed reduced price was not supported by a reliable basis and was inconsistent with the first agreement. Duty on bunkers and oil on board was upheld because the survey showed usable bunkers and fresh water, and the exemption was limited to bunkers and oils contained in the engines without proof that the goods qualified. Exemption for durable foodstuff was also denied for want of material to disturb the finding based on precedent. The appeal failed on the substantive issues, while the question of landing charges was remanded for reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31642</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>