<?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 (8) TMI 101 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262184</link>
    <description>Advertisement expenses recovered from dealers are includible in assessable value only where the manufacturer has an enforceable legal right to require dealers to incur specified advertising expenditure; where dealers voluntarily arrange advertisements and the dealership terms impose no such quantified obligation, the recovery is excluded from assessable value. The extended limitation period is unavailable without evidence of suppression, fraud, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade duty, and a previously litigated same controversy weighs against such allegations. On that basis, the duty demand, interest, and penalty were held unsustainable on merits and limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2016 16:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=392102" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 101 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262184</link>
      <description>Advertisement expenses recovered from dealers are includible in assessable value only where the manufacturer has an enforceable legal right to require dealers to incur specified advertising expenditure; where dealers voluntarily arrange advertisements and the dealership terms impose no such quantified obligation, the recovery is excluded from assessable value. The extended limitation period is unavailable without evidence of suppression, fraud, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade duty, and a previously litigated same controversy weighs against such allegations. On that basis, the duty demand, interest, and penalty were held unsustainable on merits and limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262184</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>