<?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>2015 (4) TMI 33 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258151</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Revenue in a case concerning the valuation of job work goods for excise duty calculation. It held that the realized value of scrap generated during job work should be added to the assessable value of goods, as it constituted additional consideration received by the respondent. The Tribunal emphasized that all elements of consideration, including job work charges and scrap sale proceeds, should be considered in the valuation. Additionally, the Tribunal rejected the refund claim by the respondent, stating that the payment made without protest was correct and could not be reversed, as it constituted a complete transaction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2015 13:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=380170" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 33 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258151</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Revenue in a case concerning the valuation of job work goods for excise duty calculation. It held that the realized value of scrap generated during job work should be added to the assessable value of goods, as it constituted additional consideration received by the respondent. The Tribunal emphasized that all elements of consideration, including job work charges and scrap sale proceeds, should be considered in the valuation. Additionally, the Tribunal rejected the refund claim by the respondent, stating that the payment made without protest was correct and could not be reversed, as it constituted a complete transaction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258151</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>