<?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 (12) TMI 587 - CESTAT  ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335942</link>
    <description>Compact fluorescent lamps sold in bulk to institutional buyers remained assessable under section 4A of the Central Excise Act when they were cleared with MRP affixed and otherwise fell within the MRP-based valuation regime; bulk sale or institutional supply did not, by itself, exclude section 4A. The packaged commodities rules and Rule 34 exemption principle did not alter that position on these facts. The text also states that, absent suppression of material facts or contumacious conduct, the extended period of limitation and consequential penalty were not available. The stated result was that valuation under section 4, extension of limitation, and penalty could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2016 11:24:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=451346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 587 - CESTAT  ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335942</link>
      <description>Compact fluorescent lamps sold in bulk to institutional buyers remained assessable under section 4A of the Central Excise Act when they were cleared with MRP affixed and otherwise fell within the MRP-based valuation regime; bulk sale or institutional supply did not, by itself, exclude section 4A. The packaged commodities rules and Rule 34 exemption principle did not alter that position on these facts. The text also states that, absent suppression of material facts or contumacious conduct, the extended period of limitation and consequential penalty were not available. The stated result was that valuation under section 4, extension of limitation, and penalty could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335942</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>