<?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>Related-party customs valuation upheld when competitive bidding showed price independence and inadmissible documents could not prove overvaluation.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100569</link>
    <description>Related-party customs valuation cannot be rejected where the relationship has not influenced price, especially when the imports form part of composite EPC contracts awarded through international competitive bidding to the lowest bidder. The Tribunal accepted that the declared transaction value was correctly taken because the pricing was transparent and independent, and bankers&#039; documents relied on to allege overvaluation lacked the required certificate under the Customs Act, so they could not justify rejection of value. Once misdeclaration of value failed, confiscation for misdeclaration and the consequential penalties under the Customs Act also failed. The department&#039;s appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2026 08:52:43 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2026 08:52:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=905894" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Related-party customs valuation upheld when competitive bidding showed price independence and inadmissible documents could not prove overvaluation.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100569</link>
      <description>Related-party customs valuation cannot be rejected where the relationship has not influenced price, especially when the imports form part of composite EPC contracts awarded through international competitive bidding to the lowest bidder. The Tribunal accepted that the declared transaction value was correctly taken because the pricing was transparent and independent, and bankers&#039; documents relied on to allege overvaluation lacked the required certificate under the Customs Act, so they could not justify rejection of value. Once misdeclaration of value failed, confiscation for misdeclaration and the consequential penalties under the Customs Act also failed. The department&#039;s appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jun 2026 08:52:43 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100569</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>