<?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>2008 (3) TMI 561 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123468</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in the appeal against demand confirmation and penalties imposition. It found that the denial of credit for paper used in manufacturing corrugated boxes before the facility became operational was unfounded. The Tribunal accepted the appellants&#039; explanation that the paper was integrated into their manufacturing process for wrapping glass products before placing them in corrugated boxes. As the appellants had included the paper&#039;s value in the final product&#039;s assessable value for duty payment, the Tribunal allowed the appeals, highlighting the lack of evidence showing separate clearance of paper without duty payment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:16:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160434" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (3) TMI 561 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123468</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in the appeal against demand confirmation and penalties imposition. It found that the denial of credit for paper used in manufacturing corrugated boxes before the facility became operational was unfounded. The Tribunal accepted the appellants&#039; explanation that the paper was integrated into their manufacturing process for wrapping glass products before placing them in corrugated boxes. As the appellants had included the paper&#039;s value in the final product&#039;s assessable value for duty payment, the Tribunal allowed the appeals, highlighting the lack of evidence showing separate clearance of paper without duty payment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123468</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>