<?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 613 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205860</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision that extra consideration for art work/design charges should be included in the assessable value of plastic packaging tubes. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the longer limitation period applied for the recovery of extra charges from customers due to non-disclosure to the Revenue, ultimately rejecting the appellant&#039;s challenge on the limitation period and upholding the impugned order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011 16:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=179360" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 613 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205860</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the decision that extra consideration for art work/design charges should be included in the assessable value of plastic packaging tubes. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the longer limitation period applied for the recovery of extra charges from customers due to non-disclosure to the Revenue, ultimately rejecting the appellant&#039;s challenge on the limitation period and upholding the impugned order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205860</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>