<?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 (8) TMI 464 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94022</link>
    <description>Excise valuation depends on proof that the buyer and assessee are related persons or that additional consideration passed directly or indirectly; without evidence of mutuality of interest, common directors alone do not establish such a relationship. Where the record does not show that the discount structure represents extra consideration, the sale remains a principal-to-principal transaction and the declared transaction value is not displaced. The commentary therefore states that a related-person allegation against distinct private limited companies must be supported by material evidence, failing which differential duty cannot be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 14:59:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131082" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (8) TMI 464 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94022</link>
      <description>Excise valuation depends on proof that the buyer and assessee are related persons or that additional consideration passed directly or indirectly; without evidence of mutuality of interest, common directors alone do not establish such a relationship. Where the record does not show that the discount structure represents extra consideration, the sale remains a principal-to-principal transaction and the declared transaction value is not displaced. The commentary therefore states that a related-person allegation against distinct private limited companies must be supported by material evidence, failing which differential duty cannot be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94022</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>