<?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>2026 (3) TMI 1651 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788896</link>
    <description>Transaction value under customs law may be rejected only on a legally sustainable basis supported by material creating reason to doubt the declared value; here, the authorities did not adequately examine the importer&#039;s purchase orders, invoices, correspondence, and discount-related communication before resorting to the residual method. The evidence on abnormal discount, comparability of the Revenue&#039;s discount chart, timing, project linkage, and quantity basis required fresh factual scrutiny. The rejection of the declared value was therefore not affirmed on the existing record, and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration of the evidence and redetermination of assessable value.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:27:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=893894" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 1651 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788896</link>
      <description>Transaction value under customs law may be rejected only on a legally sustainable basis supported by material creating reason to doubt the declared value; here, the authorities did not adequately examine the importer&#039;s purchase orders, invoices, correspondence, and discount-related communication before resorting to the residual method. The evidence on abnormal discount, comparability of the Revenue&#039;s discount chart, timing, project linkage, and quantity basis required fresh factual scrutiny. The rejection of the declared value was therefore not affirmed on the existing record, and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration of the evidence and redetermination of assessable value.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788896</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>