<?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>2002 (12) TMI 133 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51651</link>
    <description>Imported sub-assemblies of digital video cameras could not be treated as complete cameras under Rule 2(a) merely because they were capable of assembly into finished goods. The components were fully disclosed in the Bills of Entry, and the record did not justify reclassifying the consignments as complete cameras or valuing them on that basis; the enhancement of value was therefore not sustainable. As the goods were described as parts or sub-assemblies and no misdeclaration of their nature was shown, confiscation could not stand and the consequential penalty also failed. The appeal succeeded, and the lower authorities&#039; orders were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Sep 2010 13:43:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90129" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 133 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51651</link>
      <description>Imported sub-assemblies of digital video cameras could not be treated as complete cameras under Rule 2(a) merely because they were capable of assembly into finished goods. The components were fully disclosed in the Bills of Entry, and the record did not justify reclassifying the consignments as complete cameras or valuing them on that basis; the enhancement of value was therefore not sustainable. As the goods were described as parts or sub-assemblies and no misdeclaration of their nature was shown, confiscation could not stand and the consequential penalty also failed. The appeal succeeded, and the lower authorities&#039; orders were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51651</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>