<?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>2018 (1) TMI 639 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353903</link>
    <description>In job work valuation, assessable value is determined with reference to the job worker&#039;s value addition, including the value of the grey material in the processor&#039;s hands, job work charges, manufacturing profit and manufacturing expenses. On that basis, expenses incurred for inward transport, insurance and other overheads relating to free-supplied raw material were treated as part of the assessable value and not excludible. A plea of limitation based on bona fide belief was also rejected because the valuation issue was already settled in law, and the existence of a circular did not sustain non-payment for the relevant period. The demand and penalty were sustained, and the appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=504418" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 639 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353903</link>
      <description>In job work valuation, assessable value is determined with reference to the job worker&#039;s value addition, including the value of the grey material in the processor&#039;s hands, job work charges, manufacturing profit and manufacturing expenses. On that basis, expenses incurred for inward transport, insurance and other overheads relating to free-supplied raw material were treated as part of the assessable value and not excludible. A plea of limitation based on bona fide belief was also rejected because the valuation issue was already settled in law, and the existence of a circular did not sustain non-payment for the relevant period. The demand and penalty were sustained, and the appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353903</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>