<?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 (3) TMI 1341 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209633</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the inclusion of Optional Service Charges (OSC) and Rust Proof Protection Charges (RPP) in the assessable value for Central Excise duty, rejecting the appellants&#039; arguments that these charges were separate service contracts. The Tribunal found that customers paid these charges at the time of purchase through a composite invoice, affecting the sale price. It distinguished the case from a precedent where OSC charges were not considered part of the sale price. The Tribunal also dismissed the limitation defense raised by the appellants, confirming the demands with interest and penalties. The appeals were rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 06:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183079" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 1341 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209633</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the inclusion of Optional Service Charges (OSC) and Rust Proof Protection Charges (RPP) in the assessable value for Central Excise duty, rejecting the appellants&#039; arguments that these charges were separate service contracts. The Tribunal found that customers paid these charges at the time of purchase through a composite invoice, affecting the sale price. It distinguished the case from a precedent where OSC charges were not considered part of the sale price. The Tribunal also dismissed the limitation defense raised by the appellants, confirming the demands with interest and penalties. The appeals were rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209633</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>