<?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 (11) TMI 407 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110355</link>
    <description>Auto bulbs were considered for classification under Sub-heading 8539.10, and the interim relief issue turned on whether the retail sale price exceeded the prescribed limit rather than on bulk sale alone. The demand was based on the goods being sold in bulk and on the absence of retail price marking on each bulb, but the declared retail sale price was not shown to exceed Rs. 20 per bulb. The cited circular also supported separate treatment of bulk quantities and retail-price-based quantities for valuation purposes. On that basis, the appellants were found to have a strong prima facie case, and waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty was granted with stay.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 14:18:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147371" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (11) TMI 407 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110355</link>
      <description>Auto bulbs were considered for classification under Sub-heading 8539.10, and the interim relief issue turned on whether the retail sale price exceeded the prescribed limit rather than on bulk sale alone. The demand was based on the goods being sold in bulk and on the absence of retail price marking on each bulb, but the declared retail sale price was not shown to exceed Rs. 20 per bulb. The cited circular also supported separate treatment of bulk quantities and retail-price-based quantities for valuation purposes. On that basis, the appellants were found to have a strong prima facie case, and waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty was granted with stay.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110355</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>