Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
The appellant, a job worker, violated Rules 6 and 10A of the Central Excise Valuation Rules by not including the value of free supply material from the prime manufacturer while clearing job-worked goods on payment of duty. This amounted to suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, invoking the extended period of limitation u/s 11A(4). The assessable value should have included the value of raw materials supplied for job work, as per Supreme Court decisions. The benefit of Notification 214/86-CE was not admissible due to non-compliance with conditions. Rule 10A provided definiteness for valuation of goods manufactured and cleared by job workers.
The appellant, a job worker, violated Rules 6 and 10A of the Central Excise Valuation Rules by not including the value of free supply material from the prime manufacturer while clearing job-worked goods on payment of duty. This amounted to suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, invoking the extended period of limitation u/s 11A(4). The assessable value should have included the value of raw materials supplied for job work, as per Supreme Court decisions. The benefit of Notification 214/86-CE was not admissible due to non-compliance with conditions. Rule 10A provided definiteness for valuation of goods manufactured and cleared by job workers.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
