<?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>2023 (3) TMI 807 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435421</link>
    <description>Imported goods priced under long-term governmental arrangements were examined for related-party valuation under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The record did not establish the specific relationship contemplated by Rule 2(2), and there was no evidence of control, partnership, flow-back, or other material showing that any assumed relationship influenced the price. Applying Rule 3(3)(a), related-party transaction value remains acceptable where the circumstances of sale do not indicate price influence, and the department failed to prove otherwise. The declared value therefore could not be rejected, and the demand for differential duty, interest, and penalties was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Mar 2023 08:33:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=708096" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (3) TMI 807 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435421</link>
      <description>Imported goods priced under long-term governmental arrangements were examined for related-party valuation under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. The record did not establish the specific relationship contemplated by Rule 2(2), and there was no evidence of control, partnership, flow-back, or other material showing that any assumed relationship influenced the price. Applying Rule 3(3)(a), related-party transaction value remains acceptable where the circumstances of sale do not indicate price influence, and the department failed to prove otherwise. The declared value therefore could not be rejected, and the demand for differential duty, interest, and penalties was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435421</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>