<?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 (1) TMI 356 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94515</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai allowed the appeal as the value of goods manufactured on job work for the State Electricity Board should be determined under section 4(1)(b) and Rule 6(b) of the Valuation Rules, requiring the price to be declared in proforma VII. The respondent did not appear despite notice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 11:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131575" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (1) TMI 356 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94515</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai allowed the appeal as the value of goods manufactured on job work for the State Electricity Board should be determined under section 4(1)(b) and Rule 6(b) of the Valuation Rules, requiring the price to be declared in proforma VII. The respondent did not appear despite notice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94515</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>