<?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 487 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366751</link>
    <description>VAT subsidy discharged through VAT 37B challans under the Rajasthan investment promotion and remission scheme was treated as valid payment of VAT. Applying its earlier identical ruling, the Tribunal held that the subsidy amount was not an amount required to be added to transaction value for central excise valuation under Section 4. The excise demand therefore could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2018 08:09:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=533786" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 487 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366751</link>
      <description>VAT subsidy discharged through VAT 37B challans under the Rajasthan investment promotion and remission scheme was treated as valid payment of VAT. Applying its earlier identical ruling, the Tribunal held that the subsidy amount was not an amount required to be added to transaction value for central excise valuation under Section 4. The excise demand therefore could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366751</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>