<?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>2006 (1) TMI 638 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188899</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court remitted the case concerning the inclusion of the cost of scrap sold by the respondent in the value of components manufactured by it to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench in Mumbai for a fresh hearing based on the Cost Auditor&#039;s report. Both parties were given the opportunity to present their positions, and the Tribunal was directed to consider all connected issues during the rehearing process. The appeals were disposed of accordingly by the Supreme Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2016 10:49:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452253" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 638 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188899</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court remitted the case concerning the inclusion of the cost of scrap sold by the respondent in the value of components manufactured by it to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench in Mumbai for a fresh hearing based on the Cost Auditor&#039;s report. Both parties were given the opportunity to present their positions, and the Tribunal was directed to consider all connected issues during the rehearing process. The appeals were disposed of accordingly by the Supreme Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188899</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>