<?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>2012 (3) TMI 350 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246402</link>
    <description>Section 4A of the Central Excise Act applies only where goods are required to bear MRP under the Standards of Weights and Measures law. On the facts stated, 25 kg pesticide and insecticide packages cleared to a registered dealer were asserted to be non-retail packs later converted into 5 kg retail packs, with duty paid on the MRP basis at that stage. Because that factual claim had not been examined or rejected, and the materials did not show that the 25 kg packs themselves entered retail sale or were meant for ultimate consumers, they could not then be treated as retail packages for Section 4A. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh factual examination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:14:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353023" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (3) TMI 350 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246402</link>
      <description>Section 4A of the Central Excise Act applies only where goods are required to bear MRP under the Standards of Weights and Measures law. On the facts stated, 25 kg pesticide and insecticide packages cleared to a registered dealer were asserted to be non-retail packs later converted into 5 kg retail packs, with duty paid on the MRP basis at that stage. Because that factual claim had not been examined or rejected, and the materials did not show that the 25 kg packs themselves entered retail sale or were meant for ultimate consumers, they could not then be treated as retail packages for Section 4A. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh factual examination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246402</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>