<?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>2002 (11) TMI 508 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107118</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the Revenue&#039;s demand for increased excise duty assessment. The Tribunal found that sales to the buyer for original equipment and spares constituted different commercial levels, allowing for different prices. It was determined that the excise duty assessment should be based on the normal price for wholesale trade unless there is a relationship between the parties or additional considerations beyond price. The Tribunal accepted the appellant&#039;s argument on limitation, concluding that all necessary information was provided to the department, refuting any allegation of suppression of facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Mar 2012 17:12:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144137" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (11) TMI 508 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107118</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the Revenue&#039;s demand for increased excise duty assessment. The Tribunal found that sales to the buyer for original equipment and spares constituted different commercial levels, allowing for different prices. It was determined that the excise duty assessment should be based on the normal price for wholesale trade unless there is a relationship between the parties or additional considerations beyond price. The Tribunal accepted the appellant&#039;s argument on limitation, concluding that all necessary information was provided to the department, refuting any allegation of suppression of facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107118</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>