<?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>2011 (1) TMI 253 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203670</link>
    <description>A Board-prescribed uniform depreciation method governs the valuation of used capital goods cleared to a sister unit under excise law, and that method prevails over Income-tax depreciation rates. The analysis notes that the show-cause computation did not follow the straight line method indicated in the later circular, so the valuation required reconsideration under the correct excise procedure. A plea of revenue neutrality was rejected because the sister unit could not take immediate full credit of the duty, making the arrangement inconsistent with a neutral revenue position. The demand therefore needed fresh computation under the applicable excise depreciation method, with a further opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 12:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177226" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 253 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203670</link>
      <description>A Board-prescribed uniform depreciation method governs the valuation of used capital goods cleared to a sister unit under excise law, and that method prevails over Income-tax depreciation rates. The analysis notes that the show-cause computation did not follow the straight line method indicated in the later circular, so the valuation required reconsideration under the correct excise procedure. A plea of revenue neutrality was rejected because the sister unit could not take immediate full credit of the duty, making the arrangement inconsistent with a neutral revenue position. The demand therefore needed fresh computation under the applicable excise depreciation method, with a further opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203670</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>