<?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>2000 (9) TMI 285 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93848</link>
    <description>Where export goods cleared on bond were diverted for domestic sale, excise duty had to be assessed on the value applicable to the domestic sale under Section 4 and the governing circular, not mechanically on the value declared in the A.R. 4 export document. Because the assessable value was not properly determined after diversion to the home market, the original duty assessment could not be sustained as made. The matter was remitted for fresh assessment and reconsideration of the refund claim in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2011 13:02:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=130908" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (9) TMI 285 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93848</link>
      <description>Where export goods cleared on bond were diverted for domestic sale, excise duty had to be assessed on the value applicable to the domestic sale under Section 4 and the governing circular, not mechanically on the value declared in the A.R. 4 export document. Because the assessable value was not properly determined after diversion to the home market, the original duty assessment could not be sustained as made. The matter was remitted for fresh assessment and reconsideration of the refund claim in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93848</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>