<?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 315 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338615</link>
    <description>Physician&#039;s samples manufactured on job-work basis and cleared to the principal manufacturer were to be valued on the actual transaction value between the job worker and the principal manufacturer, namely cost of raw materials plus job charges. The subsequent free distribution of the samples by the principal manufacturer did not justify a pro rata MRP-based valuation under Section 4A. Because the goods were not cleared free of cost by the job worker, the transaction value remained the proper basis of assessment. The demand based on pro rata MRP valuation was therefore not sustainable, and the consequential valuation-based demands and penalties were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2017 12:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=457882" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 315 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338615</link>
      <description>Physician&#039;s samples manufactured on job-work basis and cleared to the principal manufacturer were to be valued on the actual transaction value between the job worker and the principal manufacturer, namely cost of raw materials plus job charges. The subsequent free distribution of the samples by the principal manufacturer did not justify a pro rata MRP-based valuation under Section 4A. Because the goods were not cleared free of cost by the job worker, the transaction value remained the proper basis of assessment. The demand based on pro rata MRP valuation was therefore not sustainable, and the consequential valuation-based demands and penalties were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338615</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>