https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782588 Transaction value under Customs law cannot be rejected merely on NIDB references or alleged contemporaneous imports; the department must show that the cited imports are comparable and that the declared price was not actually paid or that extra consideration existed. On the facts, no such material was proved, so the declared transaction value was restored. For classification, a motor controller used principally with motor machinery fell within Heading 8503 0090, and not Heading 8708 for motor vehicle parts and accessories, because the evidence did not establish that it was principally an e-rickshaw part. The assessee's declared value and classification were therefore upheld. en-us Tue, 22 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Dec 2025 08:35:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782588 Transaction value under Customs law cannot be rejected merely on NIDB references or alleged contemporaneous imports; the department must show that the cited imports are comparable and that the declared price was not actually paid or that extra consideration existed. On the facts, no such material was proved, so the declared transaction value was restored. For classification, a motor controller used principally with motor machinery fell within Heading 8503 0090, and not Heading 8708 for motor vehicle parts and accessories, because the evidence did not establish that it was principally an e-rickshaw part. The assessee's declared value and classification were therefore upheld. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 22 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782588