<?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>2013 (1) TMI 223 - CESTAT Ahmedabad</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220117</link>
    <description>Section 11D of the Central Excise Act was held inapplicable where the amount collected from customers had already been reversed under Rule 57CC for common inputs used in exempted clearances and no amount was retained by the assessee. Following the Larger Bench view, the Tribunal held that Section 11D applies only when a manufacturer collects an amount as duty and keeps it without remitting it to the revenue, so the demand was set aside. The under-valuation issue was not pursued and did not survive for adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2015 10:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=193486" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (1) TMI 223 - CESTAT Ahmedabad</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220117</link>
      <description>Section 11D of the Central Excise Act was held inapplicable where the amount collected from customers had already been reversed under Rule 57CC for common inputs used in exempted clearances and no amount was retained by the assessee. Following the Larger Bench view, the Tribunal held that Section 11D applies only when a manufacturer collects an amount as duty and keeps it without remitting it to the revenue, so the demand was set aside. The under-valuation issue was not pursued and did not survive for adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220117</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>