<?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 (12) TMI 157 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253813</link>
    <description>In provisional assessment matters, limitation for a demand must run from the date the assessment is finalised, and an unchallenged finalisation can render a later show cause notice time-barred, subject to verification of the relevant dates. For valuation, the correct basis is the price at which the greatest aggregate quantity is sold under the valuation rule, so a contrary approach is incorrect. Excess duty may be adjusted against short-payment only if the assessee proves that the duty incidence was not passed on; unjust enrichment remains a factual question requiring documentary proof. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on limitation and adjustment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:15:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=370146" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 157 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253813</link>
      <description>In provisional assessment matters, limitation for a demand must run from the date the assessment is finalised, and an unchallenged finalisation can render a later show cause notice time-barred, subject to verification of the relevant dates. For valuation, the correct basis is the price at which the greatest aggregate quantity is sold under the valuation rule, so a contrary approach is incorrect. Excess duty may be adjusted against short-payment only if the assessee proves that the duty incidence was not passed on; unjust enrichment remains a factual question requiring documentary proof. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on limitation and adjustment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253813</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>