<?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 (4) TMI 539 - COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122464</link>
    <description>Promotional packs marked as not intended for retail sale were not assessable under MRP-based valuation because Section 4A applies only where retail sale price declaration is statutorily required on packages intended for retail sale. Where MRP is absent from a mandatory requirement, or is affixed only voluntarily, valuation must proceed under Section 4. Once the Section 4A demand failed, the penalty foundation also collapsed, and the consequential penalties could not survive. The assessment therefore remained governed by normal valuation principles, and the demand and penalties were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2012 18:23:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159449" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (4) TMI 539 - COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122464</link>
      <description>Promotional packs marked as not intended for retail sale were not assessable under MRP-based valuation because Section 4A applies only where retail sale price declaration is statutorily required on packages intended for retail sale. Where MRP is absent from a mandatory requirement, or is affixed only voluntarily, valuation must proceed under Section 4. Once the Section 4A demand failed, the penalty foundation also collapsed, and the consequential penalties could not survive. The assessment therefore remained governed by normal valuation principles, and the demand and penalties were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122464</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>