https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451089 CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellant regarding valuation of imported goods. The tribunal held that royalty and advertisement costs incurred by the appellant in India should not be included in assessable value under Rule 10(1)(c) and Rule 10(1)(e) of Customs Valuation Rules 2007. Advertisement and sales promotion were deemed post-import activities undertaken by appellant on its own account, not to discharge seller's obligations. The parties were found to be unrelated as their relationship was principal-to-principal basis. Extended period of limitation was deemed unjustified as no wilful suppression was proven. The impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed. en-us Wed, 13 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Mar 2024 09:16:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451089 CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellant regarding valuation of imported goods. The tribunal held that royalty and advertisement costs incurred by the appellant in India should not be included in assessable value under Rule 10(1)(c) and Rule 10(1)(e) of Customs Valuation Rules 2007. Advertisement and sales promotion were deemed post-import activities undertaken by appellant on its own account, not to discharge seller's obligations. The parties were found to be unrelated as their relationship was principal-to-principal basis. Extended period of limitation was deemed unjustified as no wilful suppression was proven. The impugned order was set aside and appeal allowed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 13 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451089