<?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>1981 (7) TMI 69 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40949</link>
    <description>The court upheld the validity of the tariff value refixed by Notification No. 8 of 1979 for plywood tea-chests, finding it within legislative competence and not arbitrarily fixed. The court dismissed the petitions, ruling that the method used to determine the tariff value was valid, and there was no excessive delegation of power. The court concluded that the weighted average method adopted was appropriate and that the petitioners did not prove arbitrariness in the determination of the tariff value.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 May 2010 12:53:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=79480" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (7) TMI 69 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40949</link>
      <description>The court upheld the validity of the tariff value refixed by Notification No. 8 of 1979 for plywood tea-chests, finding it within legislative competence and not arbitrarily fixed. The court dismissed the petitions, ruling that the method used to determine the tariff value was valid, and there was no excessive delegation of power. The court concluded that the weighted average method adopted was appropriate and that the petitioners did not prove arbitrariness in the determination of the tariff value.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40949</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>