<?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>2020 (3) TMI 833 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393689</link>
    <description>Free-supplied tools used in manufacturing were held includible in the assessable value of the parts as additional consideration; arguments based on depreciation or reduced book value were rejected as irrelevant to excise valuation. Non-disclosure of receipt of such free supplies was treated as suppression of facts, so invocation of the extended period of limitation was justified. The demand was therefore sustained on both valuation and limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2020 10:50:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=607588" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 833 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393689</link>
      <description>Free-supplied tools used in manufacturing were held includible in the assessable value of the parts as additional consideration; arguments based on depreciation or reduced book value were rejected as irrelevant to excise valuation. Non-disclosure of receipt of such free supplies was treated as suppression of facts, so invocation of the extended period of limitation was justified. The demand was therefore sustained on both valuation and limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393689</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>