<?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>2019 (11) TMI 377 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388128</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision in favor of the respondents, allowing the deductions claimed on discounts given to buyers. It emphasized the sufficiency of evidence provided, the eligibility of discounts, and the validity of quantification based on an equalization formula. The order highlighted consistency in allowing discounts in previous assessments and rejected the department&#039;s challenge to the deductions claimed by the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2019 10:10:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=593472" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 377 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388128</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision in favor of the respondents, allowing the deductions claimed on discounts given to buyers. It emphasized the sufficiency of evidence provided, the eligibility of discounts, and the validity of quantification based on an equalization formula. The order highlighted consistency in allowing discounts in previous assessments and rejected the department&#039;s challenge to the deductions claimed by the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388128</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>