<?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>1997 (4) TMI 251 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90378</link>
    <description>Binding tribunal precedent must be followed in valuation matters unless stayed, requiring exclusion of the duty element on inputs when assessable value is computed on a cost-construction basis. Penalty provisions cannot be applied to conduct predating their commencement. The valuation and penalty determination also required reconsideration because the characterisation of concerns as both dummy units and related persons was internally inconsistent, while evidence on industrial-consumer sales and cross-examination had not been properly examined. Substantial pre-deposit relief was granted, recovery of the remaining demand and penalty was suspended subject to compliance, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Oct 2011 18:59:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127440" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (4) TMI 251 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90378</link>
      <description>Binding tribunal precedent must be followed in valuation matters unless stayed, requiring exclusion of the duty element on inputs when assessable value is computed on a cost-construction basis. Penalty provisions cannot be applied to conduct predating their commencement. The valuation and penalty determination also required reconsideration because the characterisation of concerns as both dummy units and related persons was internally inconsistent, while evidence on industrial-consumer sales and cross-examination had not been properly examined. Substantial pre-deposit relief was granted, recovery of the remaining demand and penalty was suspended subject to compliance, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90378</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>