<?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 (2) TMI 1490 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356069</link>
    <description>A plea of limitation could not be introduced for the first time in remand proceedings after the assessee had earlier accepted duty liability on quantity discount not passed on, and it was rejected. A claimed adjustment for alleged short deduction of sales tax, turnover tax and octroi failed because the assessee did not produce supporting records despite opportunities, so the claim was not accepted. The assessee was also not allowed to raise factory gate price and cum-duty valuation for the first time in remand, as those grounds had not been urged earlier and were unsupported on the record. The appeal failed in full, leaving the demand and penalty undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Feb 2018 08:21:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510252" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1490 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356069</link>
      <description>A plea of limitation could not be introduced for the first time in remand proceedings after the assessee had earlier accepted duty liability on quantity discount not passed on, and it was rejected. A claimed adjustment for alleged short deduction of sales tax, turnover tax and octroi failed because the assessee did not produce supporting records despite opportunities, so the claim was not accepted. The assessee was also not allowed to raise factory gate price and cum-duty valuation for the first time in remand, as those grounds had not been urged earlier and were unsupported on the record. The appeal failed in full, leaving the demand and penalty undisturbed.</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=356069</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>