<?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 (11) TMI 688 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239511</link>
    <description>The appeals centered on the inclusion of transportation costs in the assessable value for tax assessment. The Commissioner (Appeals) ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the alleged undervaluation lacked substantial evidence and the excess transportation charges were considered as profit, not part of the assessable value. All appeals by the assessee were allowed, while the Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed due to deficiencies in the adjudication process and failure to prove undervaluation convincingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2014 14:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=335754" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 688 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239511</link>
      <description>The appeals centered on the inclusion of transportation costs in the assessable value for tax assessment. The Commissioner (Appeals) ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the alleged undervaluation lacked substantial evidence and the excess transportation charges were considered as profit, not part of the assessable value. All appeals by the assessee were allowed, while the Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed due to deficiencies in the adjudication process and failure to prove undervaluation convincingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239511</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>