<?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>2009 (4) TMI 698 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126312</link>
    <description>Base paint sold in identifiable containers bearing MRP remained a pre-packed commodity for purposes of MRP-based valuation under section 4A of the Central Excise Act, because the Standards of Weights and Measures regime applied where retail sale price disclosure was required and the product was covered by the packaged commodities rules. Tinting at the dealer&#039;s premises in the consumer&#039;s presence, after selection of shade, did not alter the character of the goods or take them out of the pre-packed commodity framework. Valuation under section 4 was therefore unsustainable, and the related duty demand and penalties were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2012 14:54:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163209" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 698 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126312</link>
      <description>Base paint sold in identifiable containers bearing MRP remained a pre-packed commodity for purposes of MRP-based valuation under section 4A of the Central Excise Act, because the Standards of Weights and Measures regime applied where retail sale price disclosure was required and the product was covered by the packaged commodities rules. Tinting at the dealer&#039;s premises in the consumer&#039;s presence, after selection of shade, did not alter the character of the goods or take them out of the pre-packed commodity framework. Valuation under section 4 was therefore unsustainable, and the related duty demand and penalties were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126312</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>