<?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>2006 (7) TMI 418 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118574</link>
    <description>Transaction value for processed fabrics may be rejected where the claimed finished-goods price is substantially below the raw-material price and the assessee does not satisfactorily explain the disparity; valuation may then be determined on an alternative basis. Extended limitation cannot rest on non-filing of a declaration under Rule 173C where the transaction does not fall within the specified circumstances requiring that declaration, including related-party sales, captive consumption, free distribution, non-sale removals, or inter-commissioner removals. In those circumstances, non-filing does not establish suppression or misdeclaration, so a time-barred demand and consequential penalty cannot survive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2012 12:28:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155571" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 418 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118574</link>
      <description>Transaction value for processed fabrics may be rejected where the claimed finished-goods price is substantially below the raw-material price and the assessee does not satisfactorily explain the disparity; valuation may then be determined on an alternative basis. Extended limitation cannot rest on non-filing of a declaration under Rule 173C where the transaction does not fall within the specified circumstances requiring that declaration, including related-party sales, captive consumption, free distribution, non-sale removals, or inter-commissioner removals. In those circumstances, non-filing does not establish suppression or misdeclaration, so a time-barred demand and consequential penalty cannot survive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118574</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>