<?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>2003 (5) TMI 408 - CESTAT,  CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109509</link>
    <description>The Tribunal remanded the case back to the Commissioner for re-evaluation of the eligibility for the notification benefit, the quantum of fine and penalty, and the penalty on the Managing Director. The Tribunal confirmed the addition of the value of activated carbon to the assessable value but set aside the inclusion of the procurement fee in the assessable value.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 15:39:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146526" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (5) TMI 408 - CESTAT,  CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109509</link>
      <description>The Tribunal remanded the case back to the Commissioner for re-evaluation of the eligibility for the notification benefit, the quantum of fine and penalty, and the penalty on the Managing Director. The Tribunal confirmed the addition of the value of activated carbon to the assessable value but set aside the inclusion of the procurement fee in the assessable value.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109509</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>