<?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>2017 (2) TMI 308 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338608</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the royalty amount paid by the appellant to Abbott, USA, was not includible in the assessable value as no actual payment was made. Additionally, the duty demand on control samples was dismissed, following precedent that such samples are exempt from excise duty. The impugned order was set aside entirely, with penalties deemed unsustainable. As a result, the appeals were allowed, and the orders overturned on 13.01.2017.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2017 10:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=457875" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 308 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338608</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the royalty amount paid by the appellant to Abbott, USA, was not includible in the assessable value as no actual payment was made. Additionally, the duty demand on control samples was dismissed, following precedent that such samples are exempt from excise duty. The impugned order was set aside entirely, with penalties deemed unsustainable. As a result, the appeals were allowed, and the orders overturned on 13.01.2017.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338608</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>