<?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 716 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340213</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of M/s Cadila Healthcare Ltd in a case challenging an order-in-appeal regarding a quantity discount scheme for dealers. The dispute centered on duty assessment under the Central Excise Act, with the Tribunal emphasizing the importance of determining the correct sale value based on actual transaction values. The Tribunal found the demand for a differential duty unjustified, setting aside the original order and allowing the appeal on 6th February 2017.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Mar 2017 11:20:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=461469" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 716 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340213</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of M/s Cadila Healthcare Ltd in a case challenging an order-in-appeal regarding a quantity discount scheme for dealers. The dispute centered on duty assessment under the Central Excise Act, with the Tribunal emphasizing the importance of determining the correct sale value based on actual transaction values. The Tribunal found the demand for a differential duty unjustified, setting aside the original order and allowing the appeal on 6th February 2017.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340213</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>