<?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 (12) TMI 162 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351893</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, ruling the case as an instance of revenue neutrality. The duty paid was available as CENVAT credit to the sister concern, which exceeded the excise duty demand. Consequently, the demand was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. The Tribunal did not address other valuation aspects due to the established revenue neutrality principle.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2017 14:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=498515" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 162 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351893</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, ruling the case as an instance of revenue neutrality. The duty paid was available as CENVAT credit to the sister concern, which exceeded the excise duty demand. Consequently, the demand was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. The Tribunal did not address other valuation aspects due to the established revenue neutrality principle.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351893</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>