https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790937 Declared transaction value under Section 14 of the Customs Act could not be rejected without evidence that the invoice price was not actually paid, that the parties were related, or that any extra consideration existed; enhancement on the basis of similar goods was therefore unjustified, and the declared value was to be accepted. For tariff classification, an imported motor controller was held to fall under heading 8503 0090 because it functioned with the motor and was principally used with machines of heading 8501 or 8502. The exclusionary note in Section XVII did not by itself justify classification under heading 8708 in the absence of proof of exclusive or principal use as an e-rickshaw or motor vehicle part. en-us Wed, 28 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 May 2026 07:56:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790937 Declared transaction value under Section 14 of the Customs Act could not be rejected without evidence that the invoice price was not actually paid, that the parties were related, or that any extra consideration existed; enhancement on the basis of similar goods was therefore unjustified, and the declared value was to be accepted. For tariff classification, an imported motor controller was held to fall under heading 8503 0090 because it functioned with the motor and was principally used with machines of heading 8501 or 8502. The exclusionary note in Section XVII did not by itself justify classification under heading 8708 in the absence of proof of exclusive or principal use as an e-rickshaw or motor vehicle part. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 28 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790937