<?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 (8) TMI 844 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331460</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant in a case concerning the valuation of physician samples for excise duty assessment. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in a similar case, the Tribunal held that the value of the samples should be based on the sale price of the goods, regardless of the subsequent distribution by the buyer. The decision provided relief to the appellant, emphasizing that the transaction value should be considered for assessment rather than the pro rata basis suggested by the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2016 16:09:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439027" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 844 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331460</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant in a case concerning the valuation of physician samples for excise duty assessment. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in a similar case, the Tribunal held that the value of the samples should be based on the sale price of the goods, regardless of the subsequent distribution by the buyer. The decision provided relief to the appellant, emphasizing that the transaction value should be considered for assessment rather than the pro rata basis suggested by the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331460</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>