<?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 (8) TMI 1068 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155228</link>
    <description>Original value of plant and machinery for the compounded levy exemption had to be computed under the prescribed accounting standards, and general small-scale industry classification guidelines could not override the notification&#039;s valuation formula. On that basis, DG sets, transformers and effluent treatment plant were not shown to be excluded, so the prescribed three-crore limit was exceeded and exemption was denied. Penalty was not warranted because the dispute was limited to interpretation of the notification and valuation of fixed assets, so the penalty was set aside. Duty and interest demands were sustained, giving the assessee only partial relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2017 09:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 1068 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155228</link>
      <description>Original value of plant and machinery for the compounded levy exemption had to be computed under the prescribed accounting standards, and general small-scale industry classification guidelines could not override the notification&#039;s valuation formula. On that basis, DG sets, transformers and effluent treatment plant were not shown to be excluded, so the prescribed three-crore limit was exceeded and exemption was denied. Penalty was not warranted because the dispute was limited to interpretation of the notification and valuation of fixed assets, so the penalty was set aside. Duty and interest demands were sustained, giving the assessee only partial relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155228</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>