<?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 (6) TMI 75 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361248</link>
    <description>Section 4A valuation under the Central Excise Act applies only when the goods are covered by the specific valuation notification for printed retail price assessment. Mere classification under a broad tariff heading in Chapter 38 does not by itself bring every product within that heading into section 4A. On the facts, the record supported the finding that the product was a mosquito repellant covered by the applicable notification, and the Revenue did not dislodge the first appellate authority&#039;s conclusion or show that the cited precedent required a different result. The valuation order was therefore sustained and the Revenue challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=522344" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 75 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361248</link>
      <description>Section 4A valuation under the Central Excise Act applies only when the goods are covered by the specific valuation notification for printed retail price assessment. Mere classification under a broad tariff heading in Chapter 38 does not by itself bring every product within that heading into section 4A. On the facts, the record supported the finding that the product was a mosquito repellant covered by the applicable notification, and the Revenue did not dislodge the first appellate authority&#039;s conclusion or show that the cited precedent required a different result. The valuation order was therefore sustained and the Revenue challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361248</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>