<?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 (3) TMI 408 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339905</link>
    <description>Advertisement expenses incurred by a manufacturer for dealer-requested publicity were not includible in assessable value where the advertisements carried dealers&#039; names and addresses and benefited both the product and the dealers. The recoveries from dealers were treated as reimbursement for the advertising effort, not as consideration for the sale of goods. Inclusion in assessable value would require an enforceable legal right allowing the manufacturer to compel dealers to incur a specified quantum of advertisement expenditure, and that right was absent. The resulting demand for duty, interest, and penalty was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Apr 2017 14:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=460761" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 408 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339905</link>
      <description>Advertisement expenses incurred by a manufacturer for dealer-requested publicity were not includible in assessable value where the advertisements carried dealers&#039; names and addresses and benefited both the product and the dealers. The recoveries from dealers were treated as reimbursement for the advertising effort, not as consideration for the sale of goods. Inclusion in assessable value would require an enforceable legal right allowing the manufacturer to compel dealers to incur a specified quantum of advertisement expenditure, and that right was absent. The resulting demand for duty, interest, and penalty was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339905</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>