https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280322 The Tribunal allowed the appellant to add an additional ground related to the valuation of rubber tubes for central excise duty, ultimately setting aside the demand for differential duty and penalty imposition. The appellant's contention that the rubber tubes should be valued under Section 4, not Section 4A, was upheld, leading to a favorable outcome for the appellant in the appeal. The classification of rubber tubes as parts of automobiles and the applicability of specific notifications for charging duty were crucial points of contention, with the Tribunal ruling in favor of the appellant based on interpretation of relevant notifications and abatements. en-us Thu, 21 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Apr 2019 20:37:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280322 The Tribunal allowed the appellant to add an additional ground related to the valuation of rubber tubes for central excise duty, ultimately setting aside the demand for differential duty and penalty imposition. The appellant's contention that the rubber tubes should be valued under Section 4, not Section 4A, was upheld, leading to a favorable outcome for the appellant in the appeal. The classification of rubber tubes as parts of automobiles and the applicability of specific notifications for charging duty were crucial points of contention, with the Tribunal ruling in favor of the appellant based on interpretation of relevant notifications and abatements. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 21 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280322