<?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>2005 (2) TMI 691 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115938</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the inclusion of the value of packing material in the assessable value of sodium silicate due to the lack of evidence of an arrangement for return. The time bar argument was rejected as the appellants failed to declare to the Revenue the exclusion of packing material value, although the penalty imposed was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2012 18:13:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152936" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 691 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115938</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the inclusion of the value of packing material in the assessable value of sodium silicate due to the lack of evidence of an arrangement for return. The time bar argument was rejected as the appellants failed to declare to the Revenue the exclusion of packing material value, although the penalty imposed was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115938</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>