<?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 (6) TMI 483 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234658</link>
    <description>For job-work valuation under the Ujagar Prints formula, assessable value is limited to raw material cost plus conversion cost and profit. Product development and consultancy charges were excluded because the Department did not show they were attributable to the actual conversion of raw materials into finished medicaments. The product development debit note also covered multiple medicaments, while only some were manufactured and cleared, and the amount was not amortised. Payment of service tax on the product development charges further supported exclusion from central excise value. The differential duty demand was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Aug 2013 17:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=197068" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (6) TMI 483 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234658</link>
      <description>For job-work valuation under the Ujagar Prints formula, assessable value is limited to raw material cost plus conversion cost and profit. Product development and consultancy charges were excluded because the Department did not show they were attributable to the actual conversion of raw materials into finished medicaments. The product development debit note also covered multiple medicaments, while only some were manufactured and cleared, and the amount was not amortised. Payment of service tax on the product development charges further supported exclusion from central excise value. The differential duty demand was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234658</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>