<?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>2008 (7) TMI 273 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32600</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, ruling that enhancing the value of imported goods beyond the show cause notice&#039;s scope was unjustified due to lack of evidence supporting the higher valuation. The decision emphasizes the importance of adherence to specifics in show cause notices and basing adjudication orders on concrete evidence of prevailing market prices for similar goods.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71239" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 273 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32600</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, ruling that enhancing the value of imported goods beyond the show cause notice&#039;s scope was unjustified due to lack of evidence supporting the higher valuation. The decision emphasizes the importance of adherence to specifics in show cause notices and basing adjudication orders on concrete evidence of prevailing market prices for similar goods.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32600</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>