<?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 (4) TMI 1308 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359197</link>
    <description>Optional software supplied separately at the buyer&#039;s choice was disputed as part of the assessable value of manufactured goods, but the Tribunal found the valuation position was not free from doubt and had been considered in earlier Supreme Court jurisprudence. Because the assessee held a bona fide view supported by competing legal interpretations on valuation, the extended period of limitation could not be invoked for duty demand on that basis. The demand was therefore set aside on limitation in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2018 17:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518056" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1308 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359197</link>
      <description>Optional software supplied separately at the buyer&#039;s choice was disputed as part of the assessable value of manufactured goods, but the Tribunal found the valuation position was not free from doubt and had been considered in earlier Supreme Court jurisprudence. Because the assessee held a bona fide view supported by competing legal interpretations on valuation, the extended period of limitation could not be invoked for duty demand on that basis. The demand was therefore set aside on limitation in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359197</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>