<?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>2012 (9) TMI 780 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216972</link>
    <description>Traded test kit and IAS column used for checking adulteration in petroleum products were held to be distinct from the manufactured marker used with kerosene, so their value could not be added to the marker&#039;s assessable value for central excise duty. The revenue rulings cited concerned bought-out items cleared as parts of the manufactured product, which was not the factual position here. On that basis, the assessee established a strong prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit, and stay of recovery was justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Dec 2013 13:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190350" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 780 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216972</link>
      <description>Traded test kit and IAS column used for checking adulteration in petroleum products were held to be distinct from the manufactured marker used with kerosene, so their value could not be added to the marker&#039;s assessable value for central excise duty. The revenue rulings cited concerned bought-out items cleared as parts of the manufactured product, which was not the factual position here. On that basis, the assessee established a strong prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit, and stay of recovery was justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216972</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>