<?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 (5) TMI 1011 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343273</link>
    <description>Duty valuation for pre-recorded audio cassettes and CDs had to be reworked because the earlier assessment relied on a Tribunal view later reversed by the Supreme Court on inclusion of royalty and related components in assessable value. As the binding ruling had not been applied, the existing demand could not be sustained on the record. The proper course was to reassess duty liability afresh by applying the Supreme Court principle, and the impugned order was set aside with remand for fresh quantification and decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 May 2017 10:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=469372" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 1011 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343273</link>
      <description>Duty valuation for pre-recorded audio cassettes and CDs had to be reworked because the earlier assessment relied on a Tribunal view later reversed by the Supreme Court on inclusion of royalty and related components in assessable value. As the binding ruling had not been applied, the existing demand could not be sustained on the record. The proper course was to reassess duty liability afresh by applying the Supreme Court principle, and the impugned order was set aside with remand for fresh quantification and decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343273</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>