<?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>Appeal allowed; order set aside and remanded for de novo valuation under Customs Valuation Rules 1988/2007, sections 14 and 28</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92790</link>
    <description>CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, remanding the matter to the original adjudicating authority for de novo determination of the assessable value under the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988/2007 as applicable. The Tribunal found the reassessment and recovery were founded solely on investigation statements and an engineer&#039;s certificate without lawful opportunity for testing or cross-examination, constituting breach of principles of natural justice and improper reliance outside the strict procedural framework prescribed under section 14 and the Valuation Rules. The Tribunal further held that appropriation of amounts paid towards alleged duties on imports prior to the limitation period under section 28 lacked statutory empowerment and was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2025 08:08:38 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2025 08:08:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=854109" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appeal allowed; order set aside and remanded for de novo valuation under Customs Valuation Rules 1988/2007, sections 14 and 28</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92790</link>
      <description>CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, remanding the matter to the original adjudicating authority for de novo determination of the assessable value under the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 1988/2007 as applicable. The Tribunal found the reassessment and recovery were founded solely on investigation statements and an engineer&#039;s certificate without lawful opportunity for testing or cross-examination, constituting breach of principles of natural justice and improper reliance outside the strict procedural framework prescribed under section 14 and the Valuation Rules. The Tribunal further held that appropriation of amounts paid towards alleged duties on imports prior to the limitation period under section 28 lacked statutory empowerment and was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2025 08:08:38 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92790</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>