<?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 (7) TMI 351 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249314</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the duty demand, interest, and penalty imposed on the appellant, a manufacturer of gases, for recovering excess freight charges from customers. The Department&#039;s contention that the excess freight should be included in the assessable value of goods sold was rejected. Sales were determined not to be on FOR basis, as evidence did not support this, and invoices showed freight charges separately. The Tribunal cited the Baroda Electric Meters Ltd. case, holding the excess freight amount not includible in the assessable value. The appeal and stay application were allowed, and the impugned order was overturned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2014 12:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=359217" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (7) TMI 351 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249314</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the duty demand, interest, and penalty imposed on the appellant, a manufacturer of gases, for recovering excess freight charges from customers. The Department&#039;s contention that the excess freight should be included in the assessable value of goods sold was rejected. Sales were determined not to be on FOR basis, as evidence did not support this, and invoices showed freight charges separately. The Tribunal cited the Baroda Electric Meters Ltd. case, holding the excess freight amount not includible in the assessable value. The appeal and stay application were allowed, and the impugned order was overturned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249314</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>