<?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 (10) TMI 1727 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266452</link>
    <description>Sales tax collected under a deferment scheme remained deductible from central excise assessable value where the assessee was statutorily liable for the full tax at a future date and could discharge that liability earlier by paying net present value. The transaction value had to be fixed at the time and place of removal, so the later prepayment did not change the amount of sales tax actually payable on that date. The State law treated the net present value payment as discharge of the deferred liability, and the differential could not be added to transaction value. The incentive-based structure considered in Super Synotex was distinguished because that case involved tax never becoming payable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2016 18:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=402466" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 1727 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266452</link>
      <description>Sales tax collected under a deferment scheme remained deductible from central excise assessable value where the assessee was statutorily liable for the full tax at a future date and could discharge that liability earlier by paying net present value. The transaction value had to be fixed at the time and place of removal, so the later prepayment did not change the amount of sales tax actually payable on that date. The State law treated the net present value payment as discharge of the deferred liability, and the differential could not be added to transaction value. The incentive-based structure considered in Super Synotex was distinguished because that case involved tax never becoming payable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266452</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>