<?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 (7) TMI 889 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345777</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the appeal. It held that modification charges must be included in the assessable value of excisable goods as per Central Excise Valuation Rules, even if separate from manufacturing. The demand was not time-barred due to suppression of facts regarding modification charges. Revenue neutrality was not established as the customer&#039;s cenvat credit eligibility lacked evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=483095" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 889 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345777</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, dismissing the appeal. It held that modification charges must be included in the assessable value of excisable goods as per Central Excise Valuation Rules, even if separate from manufacturing. The demand was not time-barred due to suppression of facts regarding modification charges. Revenue neutrality was not established as the customer&#039;s cenvat credit eligibility lacked evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345777</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>