<?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 329 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243732</link>
    <description>Valuation of job-work manufactured medicines under Rule 173C of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 turned on whether the declared landed cost of raw materials properly included transportation, insurance and taxes. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the Cost Accountant&#039;s certificate after examining supplier invoices and supporting material and found that freight, insurance and CST had been accounted for in the landed cost. The Revenue&#039;s challenge was based on assumptions and did not identify any verified defect in the certificate or specific infirmity in the valuation exercise. The duty demand was therefore not sustained and the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s findings were left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Feb 2014 12:32:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=345311" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 329 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243732</link>
      <description>Valuation of job-work manufactured medicines under Rule 173C of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 turned on whether the declared landed cost of raw materials properly included transportation, insurance and taxes. The Commissioner (Appeals) accepted the Cost Accountant&#039;s certificate after examining supplier invoices and supporting material and found that freight, insurance and CST had been accounted for in the landed cost. The Revenue&#039;s challenge was based on assumptions and did not identify any verified defect in the certificate or specific infirmity in the valuation exercise. The duty demand was therefore not sustained and the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s findings were left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243732</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>