<?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 (9) TMI 226 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51708</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner of Customs&#039; order, which enhanced the assessable value of Brass Scrap and Copper Scrap based solely on London Metal Exchange (LME) prices without contemporaneous import evidence. The Tribunal found that relying on LME prices without proof of imports at similar prices is impermissible under law. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed as the assessment solely based on LME prices was legally unsustainable. The Deputy Commissioner&#039;s mention of contemporaneous imports at similar prices was deemed insufficient without providing details during the appeal, leading to the overturning of the order and granting of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Sep 2010 17:40:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90186" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (9) TMI 226 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51708</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner of Customs&#039; order, which enhanced the assessable value of Brass Scrap and Copper Scrap based solely on London Metal Exchange (LME) prices without contemporaneous import evidence. The Tribunal found that relying on LME prices without proof of imports at similar prices is impermissible under law. The appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed as the assessment solely based on LME prices was legally unsustainable. The Deputy Commissioner&#039;s mention of contemporaneous imports at similar prices was deemed insufficient without providing details during the appeal, leading to the overturning of the order and granting of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51708</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>