<?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>2007 (3) TMI 132 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1952</link>
    <description>Valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 permits inclusion only of additional consideration flowing directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee. Third-party reimbursement of advertisement and sales promotion expenses, where the relationship was found to be commercial and on a principal-to-principal, arm&#039;s length basis, was not part of buyer consideration and could not be added to assessable value. The text also notes that, on the facts found, there was no lawful basis to invoke the extended limitation period because the reimbursed amounts were not required to be disclosed as assessable consideration. The demand was therefore unsustainable on both valuation and limitation grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41330" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (3) TMI 132 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1952</link>
      <description>Valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 permits inclusion only of additional consideration flowing directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee. Third-party reimbursement of advertisement and sales promotion expenses, where the relationship was found to be commercial and on a principal-to-principal, arm&#039;s length basis, was not part of buyer consideration and could not be added to assessable value. The text also notes that, on the facts found, there was no lawful basis to invoke the extended limitation period because the reimbursed amounts were not required to be disclosed as assessable consideration. The demand was therefore unsustainable on both valuation and limitation grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1952</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>