<?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 (7) TMI 512 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116485</link>
    <description>Warranty-related internal accounting allocations could not be added to the assessable value because there was no evidence of any extra consideration flowing from buyers to the seller. The record showed that the warranty cost entries were only internal allocations among the assessee&#039;s factories and did not affect the sale price accepted in the tender process. Rejection of the assessee&#039;s claim for lack of a chartered accountant certificate was unsustainable when no such certificate had been sought. In the absence of supporting material, the valuation rules could not be invoked and the declared sale price remained the correct basis for assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2012 18:39:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153483" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 512 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116485</link>
      <description>Warranty-related internal accounting allocations could not be added to the assessable value because there was no evidence of any extra consideration flowing from buyers to the seller. The record showed that the warranty cost entries were only internal allocations among the assessee&#039;s factories and did not affect the sale price accepted in the tender process. Rejection of the assessee&#039;s claim for lack of a chartered accountant certificate was unsustainable when no such certificate had been sought. In the absence of supporting material, the valuation rules could not be invoked and the declared sale price remained the correct basis for assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116485</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>