<?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 (6) TMI 347 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395972</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, emphasizing the distinction in valuation for goods sold to unrelated buyers and related persons based on the Circular&#039;s guidance. The decision provided clarity on valuation rules in cases involving sales to independent buyers and transfers to related parties, ensuring consistent application of valuation principles under the Central Excise Act. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2020 10:31:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=615264" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 347 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395972</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, emphasizing the distinction in valuation for goods sold to unrelated buyers and related persons based on the Circular&#039;s guidance. The decision provided clarity on valuation rules in cases involving sales to independent buyers and transfers to related parties, ensuring consistent application of valuation principles under the Central Excise Act. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395972</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>