<?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 (11) TMI 1325 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351446</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand of duty and interest under Rule 10A for fabricating and mounting bodies on chassis supplied by another company. The activity was deemed to fall under Rule 10A for valuation purposes. The penalty was canceled due to lack of justification, but the duty demand and interest were upheld. The appeal partially succeeded with the penalty being revoked while the duty demand and interest were maintained based on legal provisions and precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Nov 2017 08:01:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=497612" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 1325 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351446</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand of duty and interest under Rule 10A for fabricating and mounting bodies on chassis supplied by another company. The activity was deemed to fall under Rule 10A for valuation purposes. The penalty was canceled due to lack of justification, but the duty demand and interest were upheld. The appeal partially succeeded with the penalty being revoked while the duty demand and interest were maintained based on legal provisions and precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351446</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>