<?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>2010 (5) TMI 274 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78052</link>
    <description>Service charges for storage, handling, security, manpower support, materials management and furnishing work were treated as manufacturing overheads and held includible in the assessable value of housing and freight containers, so the duty demand on that basis was upheld. For the later period after August 1996, the extended limitation could not be sustained once the Department had knowledge of the relevant facts, and the demand for that period was set aside. Interest and mandatory penalty were reduced accordingly, with interest and penalty under the excise provisions excluded for the set-aside period, while the separate penalty for the earlier period was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 274 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78052</link>
      <description>Service charges for storage, handling, security, manpower support, materials management and furnishing work were treated as manufacturing overheads and held includible in the assessable value of housing and freight containers, so the duty demand on that basis was upheld. For the later period after August 1996, the extended limitation could not be sustained once the Department had knowledge of the relevant facts, and the demand for that period was set aside. Interest and mandatory penalty were reduced accordingly, with interest and penalty under the excise provisions excluded for the set-aside period, while the separate penalty for the earlier period was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78052</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>