<?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>2001 (11) TMI 77 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46013</link>
    <description>The Customs, Excise &amp;amp; Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal overturned the decision of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) regarding the valuation of imported goods. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of evidence establishing the companies as related persons, crucial for loading the declared value with an additional 20%. The authorities&#039; reliance on equity participation and technical data exchange was deemed insufficient, with the Tribunal requiring proof of mutual interest for related person status. Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to the absence of acceptable material supporting the related person inference, ultimately upholding its decision to set aside previous orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2016 13:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84539" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (11) TMI 77 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46013</link>
      <description>The Customs, Excise &amp;amp; Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal overturned the decision of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) regarding the valuation of imported goods. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of evidence establishing the companies as related persons, crucial for loading the declared value with an additional 20%. The authorities&#039; reliance on equity participation and technical data exchange was deemed insufficient, with the Tribunal requiring proof of mutual interest for related person status. Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal due to the absence of acceptable material supporting the related person inference, ultimately upholding its decision to set aside previous orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46013</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>