<?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>2005 (2) TMI 360 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54086</link>
    <description>Imported goods described as scrap were found factually to be bundled mild steel flat bars of uniform lengths, so the misdescription attracted confiscation under the Customs Act. The declared transaction value, however, could not be rejected merely by reference to London Metal Exchange prices because transaction value must be accepted unless the Revenue establishes a specific ground for non-acceptance under the valuation rules. As no such ground was proved, the declared value was upheld. Since the duty rate was the same for scrap and flat bars, no motive for misdeclaration was shown, and the redemption fine and penalty were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:48:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 360 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54086</link>
      <description>Imported goods described as scrap were found factually to be bundled mild steel flat bars of uniform lengths, so the misdescription attracted confiscation under the Customs Act. The declared transaction value, however, could not be rejected merely by reference to London Metal Exchange prices because transaction value must be accepted unless the Revenue establishes a specific ground for non-acceptance under the valuation rules. As no such ground was proved, the declared value was upheld. Since the duty rate was the same for scrap and flat bars, no motive for misdeclaration was shown, and the redemption fine and penalty were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54086</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>