<?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>2016 (3) TMI 666 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325482</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, holding that the advertisement expenses incurred by wholesale dealers should not be included in the assessable value of goods sold. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of enforceable legal obligations for manufacturers to bear such expenses, citing relevant precedents and legal principles. The decision overturned the duty demand and penalties imposed by the Original Authority, aligning with established legal positions and rejecting the Revenue&#039;s arguments linking dealer expenses to sales volume conditions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2016 12:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=420838" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 666 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325482</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, holding that the advertisement expenses incurred by wholesale dealers should not be included in the assessable value of goods sold. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of enforceable legal obligations for manufacturers to bear such expenses, citing relevant precedents and legal principles. The decision overturned the duty demand and penalties imposed by the Original Authority, aligning with established legal positions and rejecting the Revenue&#039;s arguments linking dealer expenses to sales volume conditions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325482</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>