<?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>2008 (2) TMI 112 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4506</link>
    <description>Duty was sustained on the shortage of finished goods found during stock verification because the physical shortage, read with the RG-1 records, was treated as evidence of prior manufacture and clearance; the exact date of manufacture was held irrelevant once the shortage established non-availability in stock. The value of bought-out saddle and PCN used in sprinkler couplers was also held includible in assessable value because they were found to be integral and essential to the functioning of the sprinkler irrigation system. Penalty was upheld in principle, but reduced to Rs. 5,00,000, and the remaining penalty under the cited rules was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43848" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 112 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4506</link>
      <description>Duty was sustained on the shortage of finished goods found during stock verification because the physical shortage, read with the RG-1 records, was treated as evidence of prior manufacture and clearance; the exact date of manufacture was held irrelevant once the shortage established non-availability in stock. The value of bought-out saddle and PCN used in sprinkler couplers was also held includible in assessable value because they were found to be integral and essential to the functioning of the sprinkler irrigation system. Penalty was upheld in principle, but reduced to Rs. 5,00,000, and the remaining penalty under the cited rules was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4506</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>