<?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 (9) TMI 177 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331916</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the order demanding differential duty, ruling that unutilized additional excise duty credit need not be added to the assessable value of the final product. Citing legal precedent, the Tribunal held that as the final product was sold at transactional value and the appellant did not seek to deduct the credit from the product&#039;s cost, there was no basis for including it. This decision clarifies the treatment of excise duty credits in manufacturing processes and emphasizes adherence to legal principles in determining tax liabilities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2016 14:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440112" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 177 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331916</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the order demanding differential duty, ruling that unutilized additional excise duty credit need not be added to the assessable value of the final product. Citing legal precedent, the Tribunal held that as the final product was sold at transactional value and the appellant did not seek to deduct the credit from the product&#039;s cost, there was no basis for including it. This decision clarifies the treatment of excise duty credits in manufacturing processes and emphasizes adherence to legal principles in determining tax liabilities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331916</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>