<?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 (8) TMI 1156 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347098</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI ruled in favor of the appellant, M/s. Devi Polymers (P) Ltd., and its Executive Director, against the demand of excise duty for including the value of bought out items required for assembling water tanks along with panels manufactured by the appellant. The Tribunal held that bought out items supplied for customer convenience need not be included in the assessable value for excise duty payment, citing relevant legal precedents and a Supreme Court decision. Additionally, the Tribunal allowed the appeal regarding the rejection of the refund claim for excise duty paid on bought out items during a specific period, setting aside the impugned orders in both cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Aug 2017 07:08:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=487194" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1156 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347098</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI ruled in favor of the appellant, M/s. Devi Polymers (P) Ltd., and its Executive Director, against the demand of excise duty for including the value of bought out items required for assembling water tanks along with panels manufactured by the appellant. The Tribunal held that bought out items supplied for customer convenience need not be included in the assessable value for excise duty payment, citing relevant legal precedents and a Supreme Court decision. Additionally, the Tribunal allowed the appeal regarding the rejection of the refund claim for excise duty paid on bought out items during a specific period, setting aside the impugned orders in both cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347098</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>