<?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 (9) TMI 168 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366432</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, stating that no expenses were incurred by the appellants in the sale of gypsum to the contractor, and therefore, the charges incurred by the buyer should not be included in the assessable value. The decision was based on previous decisions in the appellants&#039; favor and was pronounced on August 24, 2018.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2018 07:43:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=533166" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 168 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366432</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, stating that no expenses were incurred by the appellants in the sale of gypsum to the contractor, and therefore, the charges incurred by the buyer should not be included in the assessable value. The decision was based on previous decisions in the appellants&#039; favor and was pronounced on August 24, 2018.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366432</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>