<?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 998 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209156</link>
    <description>The dispute concerned whether the cost of drawings and designs was includable in assessable value and, if so, the correct quantification of that element. As the record did not clearly establish the attributable quantum and the lower authorities had not examined the issue in detail, a fresh examination was required. The matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for detailed quantification and a fresh order after granting the assessee due hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182609" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 998 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209156</link>
      <description>The dispute concerned whether the cost of drawings and designs was includable in assessable value and, if so, the correct quantification of that element. As the record did not clearly establish the attributable quantum and the lower authorities had not examined the issue in detail, a fresh examination was required. The matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for detailed quantification and a fresh order after granting the assessee due hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209156</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>