<?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 1518 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336873</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of M/s. Blue Star Limited, holding that freight charges should not be included in the assessable value of goods cleared on a self basis. Valuation under Section 4(1)(b) read with Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 was deemed appropriate, with Rule 8 applying to the cost construction method at 115% of the cost of manufacturing. The decision was supported by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) and CBEC Circular No. 692/8/2003-CX, emphasizing valuation for captive consumption in accordance with CAS-4. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals, upholding the respondent&#039;s valuation and setting aside the claims of undervaluation and duty short payment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Nov 2017 14:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453544" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1518 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336873</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of M/s. Blue Star Limited, holding that freight charges should not be included in the assessable value of goods cleared on a self basis. Valuation under Section 4(1)(b) read with Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 was deemed appropriate, with Rule 8 applying to the cost construction method at 115% of the cost of manufacturing. The decision was supported by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) and CBEC Circular No. 692/8/2003-CX, emphasizing valuation for captive consumption in accordance with CAS-4. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals, upholding the respondent&#039;s valuation and setting aside the claims of undervaluation and duty short payment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336873</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>