<?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>2001 (1) TMI 384 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95423</link>
    <description>The judgment upheld the inclusion of the cost of punches in the assessable value of circuit boards due to the appellant&#039;s conduct. The demand was not barred by limitation as the appellant failed to disclose the cost to the department. The assessable value was to be calculated based on the proportionate cost of punches used. The penalty imposed on the appellant was set aside, and the demand for interest was deemed unsustainable, resulting in partial allowance of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Dec 2011 12:50:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132482" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (1) TMI 384 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95423</link>
      <description>The judgment upheld the inclusion of the cost of punches in the assessable value of circuit boards due to the appellant&#039;s conduct. The demand was not barred by limitation as the appellant failed to disclose the cost to the department. The assessable value was to be calculated based on the proportionate cost of punches used. The penalty imposed on the appellant was set aside, and the demand for interest was deemed unsustainable, resulting in partial allowance of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95423</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>