<?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 (8) TMI 610 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115728</link>
    <description>In job-work valuation of iron and steel products cleared on behalf of a merchant supplier, assessable value is confined to raw material cost, conversion charges and the job worker&#039;s profit. The merchant&#039;s sale price and profit cannot be added where the goods are processed from merchant-supplied inputs and sold on the merchant&#039;s behalf. Applying an earlier Tribunal ruling on identical facts, and noting that it had neither been stayed nor overruled, the Tribunal found no basis to alter the valuation adopted by the job worker. The Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed and the impugned valuation order was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 14:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152727" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 610 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115728</link>
      <description>In job-work valuation of iron and steel products cleared on behalf of a merchant supplier, assessable value is confined to raw material cost, conversion charges and the job worker&#039;s profit. The merchant&#039;s sale price and profit cannot be added where the goods are processed from merchant-supplied inputs and sold on the merchant&#039;s behalf. Applying an earlier Tribunal ruling on identical facts, and noting that it had neither been stayed nor overruled, the Tribunal found no basis to alter the valuation adopted by the job worker. The Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed and the impugned valuation order was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115728</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>