<?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 (1) TMI 529 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119402</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty and directed the adjudicating authority to recalculate the duty by excluding the value of traded items and repair charges from the total clearance value. The appeal was disposed of by way of remand, emphasizing the proper calculation of duty based on exclusion of traded items and repair charges, and the application of cum-duty price principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:15:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156399" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 529 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119402</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty and directed the adjudicating authority to recalculate the duty by excluding the value of traded items and repair charges from the total clearance value. The appeal was disposed of by way of remand, emphasizing the proper calculation of duty based on exclusion of traded items and repair charges, and the application of cum-duty price principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119402</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>