<?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>2006 (2) TMI 21 - Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459</link>
    <description>Hair dye cosmetics packed in sachets of less than 10 grams were treated as exempt under Rule 34 of the Packaged Commodities Rules because the governing standards regime requires cosmetics to be sold by weight or volume and the commodity in the package is the relevant unit for declaration and sale. On that basis, section 4A of the Central Excise Act did not apply, as retail sale price valuation is triggered only where a notification and a legal requirement to declare the retail sale price exist. The Tribunal also treated the contrary observation in the earlier Madras High Court decision as per incuriam for being unsupported by the relevant provisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39908" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 21 - Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459</link>
      <description>Hair dye cosmetics packed in sachets of less than 10 grams were treated as exempt under Rule 34 of the Packaged Commodities Rules because the governing standards regime requires cosmetics to be sold by weight or volume and the commodity in the package is the relevant unit for declaration and sale. On that basis, section 4A of the Central Excise Act did not apply, as retail sale price valuation is triggered only where a notification and a legal requirement to declare the retail sale price exist. The Tribunal also treated the contrary observation in the earlier Madras High Court decision as per incuriam for being unsupported by the relevant provisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>