https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53595 Declared transaction value for second-hand capital goods imported in a related-party transaction may be rejected where the importer fails to show that the relationship did not influence price or to produce contemporaneous values of identical or similar goods under Rule 4(3). In the absence of such supporting evidence, valuation may move to Rule 8, and depreciation-based valuation of second-hand machinery is treated as a permissible and rational method. On the stated facts, the rejection of the declared value and adoption of the depreciated-value method were upheld. en-us Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Oct 2010 11:51:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53595 Declared transaction value for second-hand capital goods imported in a related-party transaction may be rejected where the importer fails to show that the relationship did not influence price or to produce contemporaneous values of identical or similar goods under Rule 4(3). In the absence of such supporting evidence, valuation may move to Rule 8, and depreciation-based valuation of second-hand machinery is treated as a permissible and rational method. On the stated facts, the rejection of the declared value and adoption of the depreciated-value method were upheld. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53595