<?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 (3) TMI 538 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78425</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad allowed the appeal in a case concerning a refund claim related to duty payment arising from a price variation clause in an agreement for the clearance of a consignment. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities had acted arbitrarily and against the law in rejecting the refund claim, emphasizing that the crucial aspect was the admissibility of the claim under the law. It clarified that duty is payable based on the transaction value for each removal, and in cases of price variation, the transaction value should be determined accordingly. The Tribunal granted consequential relief to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2010 11:49:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116548" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (3) TMI 538 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78425</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad allowed the appeal in a case concerning a refund claim related to duty payment arising from a price variation clause in an agreement for the clearance of a consignment. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities had acted arbitrarily and against the law in rejecting the refund claim, emphasizing that the crucial aspect was the admissibility of the claim under the law. It clarified that duty is payable based on the transaction value for each removal, and in cases of price variation, the transaction value should be determined accordingly. The Tribunal granted consequential relief to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78425</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>