<?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>2014 (2) TMI 211 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243612</link>
    <description>The Tribunal determined that the transactions between the OEMs and M/s. Symphony were sales, not job work. Valuation was to be conducted under Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 6. The appeals by the appellants were allowed, setting aside the Adjudicating authority&#039;s orders with consequential relief, as penalties and confiscation were deemed unjustified based on the nature of the transactions and correct valuation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2014 10:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=345045" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 211 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243612</link>
      <description>The Tribunal determined that the transactions between the OEMs and M/s. Symphony were sales, not job work. Valuation was to be conducted under Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 6. The appeals by the appellants were allowed, setting aside the Adjudicating authority&#039;s orders with consequential relief, as penalties and confiscation were deemed unjustified based on the nature of the transactions and correct valuation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243612</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>