<?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 (10) TMI 439 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114568</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi ruled in favor of the appellants in a case involving the valuation of mattresses and pillows sold together. The Tribunal determined that the pillows were not being gifted but were part of the set sold by the appellants based on evidence presented, such as price declarations. The decision emphasized the appellants&#039; right to adjust sales patterns and prices. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, providing relief to the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 17:24:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151567" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (10) TMI 439 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114568</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi ruled in favor of the appellants in a case involving the valuation of mattresses and pillows sold together. The Tribunal determined that the pillows were not being gifted but were part of the set sold by the appellants based on evidence presented, such as price declarations. The decision emphasized the appellants&#039; right to adjust sales patterns and prices. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, providing relief to the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114568</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>