<?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>2003 (3) TMI 659 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119298</link>
    <description>Supervision charges collected under a separate service contract were treated as not automatically includible in the assessable value for central excise where the assessee showed a prima facie case that the charges were independent service charges with no demonstrated nexus to the supply of goods or to any specific valuation element. On that basis, the Tribunal granted full waiver of pre-deposit and stayed recovery of the demand pending disposal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:30:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156295" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 659 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119298</link>
      <description>Supervision charges collected under a separate service contract were treated as not automatically includible in the assessable value for central excise where the assessee showed a prima facie case that the charges were independent service charges with no demonstrated nexus to the supply of goods or to any specific valuation element. On that basis, the Tribunal granted full waiver of pre-deposit and stayed recovery of the demand pending disposal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119298</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>