<?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 (9) TMI 382 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236950</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision that Rule 10A was not applicable as INNOCORP and DART operated on a principal-to-principal basis with TUPPERWARE. The assessable value was correctly determined under Rule 6, and no collusion or intent to evade duty was found. Therefore, penalties under Section 11AC and Rule 25 were not imposed. The appeals were dismissed on 8-5-2012.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Sep 2013 12:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=199357" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (9) TMI 382 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236950</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision that Rule 10A was not applicable as INNOCORP and DART operated on a principal-to-principal basis with TUPPERWARE. The assessable value was correctly determined under Rule 6, and no collusion or intent to evade duty was found. Therefore, penalties under Section 11AC and Rule 25 were not imposed. The appeals were dismissed on 8-5-2012.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236950</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>