<?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>1990 (7) TMI 217 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80705</link>
    <description>Under the unamended Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, assessable value was to be based on the wholesale cash price at the factory gate, and the price charged to the nearest customers was treated as the relevant factory-gate price capable of being realised; the valuation adopted by the department was therefore upheld. The duty demand nevertheless failed because the show cause notice was issued beyond the six-month limitation under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, and the record did not establish suppression or any other basis to defeat the time bar. The assessee obtained partial relief, as the valuation stood but the demand was held time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Jun 2011 16:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117851" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (7) TMI 217 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80705</link>
      <description>Under the unamended Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, assessable value was to be based on the wholesale cash price at the factory gate, and the price charged to the nearest customers was treated as the relevant factory-gate price capable of being realised; the valuation adopted by the department was therefore upheld. The duty demand nevertheless failed because the show cause notice was issued beyond the six-month limitation under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, and the record did not establish suppression or any other basis to defeat the time bar. The assessee obtained partial relief, as the valuation stood but the demand was held time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80705</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>