<?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 (6) TMI 621 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248717</link>
    <description>Rule 5 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975 applies only where additional consideration flows directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee for the goods sold. Buyer-incurred post-sale advertisement and sales promotion expenses were held not includible in assessable value because no enforceable obligation or proved flow back was shown. By contrast, non-compete fee and trademark licence fee formed part of an interlinked commercial arrangement and were treated as additional consideration, making them includible in value. Non-disclosure of the relevant agreements supported invocation of the extended period. Interest was sustained from the statutory commencement date, confiscation with redemption fine was upheld, and penalties were not sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2014 10:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=357892" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 621 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248717</link>
      <description>Rule 5 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975 applies only where additional consideration flows directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee for the goods sold. Buyer-incurred post-sale advertisement and sales promotion expenses were held not includible in assessable value because no enforceable obligation or proved flow back was shown. By contrast, non-compete fee and trademark licence fee formed part of an interlinked commercial arrangement and were treated as additional consideration, making them includible in value. Non-disclosure of the relevant agreements supported invocation of the extended period. Interest was sustained from the statutory commencement date, confiscation with redemption fine was upheld, and penalties were not sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248717</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>