<?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 (12) TMI 520 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125316</link>
    <description>Physician samples were required to be assessed on the basis of 115% of cost of production under the applicable Board circular, which was binding on the Revenue. The appellate order granting refund of excess duty was consistent with that circular, and no legal infirmity was found in that approach. Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed, and the order in favour of the assessee was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2012 17:30:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=162235" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (12) TMI 520 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125316</link>
      <description>Physician samples were required to be assessed on the basis of 115% of cost of production under the applicable Board circular, which was binding on the Revenue. The appellate order granting refund of excess duty was consistent with that circular, and no legal infirmity was found in that approach. Revenue&#039;s challenge therefore failed, and the order in favour of the assessee was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125316</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>