<?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>2004 (2) TMI 560 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112892</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal after waiving the pre-deposit amount, following the interpretation that duty of excise is on the manufacturer, not on transportation costs. The decision was based on the exclusion of excess freight from the assessable value of goods manufactured, in line with the Apex Court&#039;s ruling in Baroda Electric Meters Ltd. v. CCE. The judgment provided clarity on the issue, setting aside the impugned order and ruling in favor of the assessees.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 13:46:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149908" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (2) TMI 560 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112892</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal after waiving the pre-deposit amount, following the interpretation that duty of excise is on the manufacturer, not on transportation costs. The decision was based on the exclusion of excess freight from the assessable value of goods manufactured, in line with the Apex Court&#039;s ruling in Baroda Electric Meters Ltd. v. CCE. The judgment provided clarity on the issue, setting aside the impugned order and ruling in favor of the assessees.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112892</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>