<?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 (9) TMI 332 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207282</link>
    <description>Deductions claimed from the value of goods cleared on stock-transfer basis were found inadmissible because no provision of law supported discounts or deductions for captively consumed goods. The appellant also admitted lapses in its reply to the show cause notice, and there was no dispute on the sale price available for valuation. On that factual basis, the claimed deductions from the sale price were rejected, and the demand and penalties in the impugned order were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Dec 2013 16:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=180761" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (9) TMI 332 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207282</link>
      <description>Deductions claimed from the value of goods cleared on stock-transfer basis were found inadmissible because no provision of law supported discounts or deductions for captively consumed goods. The appellant also admitted lapses in its reply to the show cause notice, and there was no dispute on the sale price available for valuation. On that factual basis, the claimed deductions from the sale price were rejected, and the demand and penalties in the impugned order were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207282</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>