<?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>2016 (10) TMI 1065 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193492</link>
    <description>Central excise valuation of petroleum products turned on whether clearances from the warehouse to company-owned, company-operated outlets were to be assessed under Section 4(1)(a) on transaction value or under Section 4(1)(b) read with Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules. The extract states that the relevant period was March 1999 to November 2001 and that the dispute depended on the statutory concept of place of removal, including whether depots or outlets formed part of that place for valuation purposes. The text records that the issue was treated as covered by an earlier Tribunal ruling on valuation and place of removal, with the final dispositive direction not set out in the supplied extract.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2017 11:01:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=484077" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 1065 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193492</link>
      <description>Central excise valuation of petroleum products turned on whether clearances from the warehouse to company-owned, company-operated outlets were to be assessed under Section 4(1)(a) on transaction value or under Section 4(1)(b) read with Rule 7 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules. The extract states that the relevant period was March 1999 to November 2001 and that the dispute depended on the statutory concept of place of removal, including whether depots or outlets formed part of that place for valuation purposes. The text records that the issue was treated as covered by an earlier Tribunal ruling on valuation and place of removal, with the final dispositive direction not set out in the supplied extract.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193492</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>