<?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 (3) TMI 662 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116169</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case concerning the demand for a differential duty on motor spirit and high-speed diesel cleared from the refinery to the terminal without payment of duty. The issue revolved around the notional inclusion of transportation charges in the assessable value of goods sold from the terminal. The Tribunal held that adding transportation charges notionally was incorrect as the price already included such costs, especially when not separately recovered from buyers. As the appellants did not charge or claim deductions for transportation, the demand for duty payment was deemed unsustainable, leading to the appeal being allowed in favor of the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2012 15:15:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153167" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (3) TMI 662 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116169</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case concerning the demand for a differential duty on motor spirit and high-speed diesel cleared from the refinery to the terminal without payment of duty. The issue revolved around the notional inclusion of transportation charges in the assessable value of goods sold from the terminal. The Tribunal held that adding transportation charges notionally was incorrect as the price already included such costs, especially when not separately recovered from buyers. As the appellants did not charge or claim deductions for transportation, the demand for duty payment was deemed unsustainable, leading to the appeal being allowed in favor of the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116169</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>