<?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>Supreme Court Upholds Valuation Method for Duty Payment u/s 4(1)(a), Dismisses Additional Demand.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=57230</link>
    <description>Method of Valuation - assessable value adopted for payment of duty is lower than the actual cost of manufacture of said products - there is no flow back of additional consideration - The Apex Court taking note of the fact that when there was no additional consideration and the goods were cleared to independent buyers, upheld the valuation adopted by the assessee under Section 4(1)(a). - Demand set aside - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2021 10:45:32 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2021 10:45:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=639311" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Upholds Valuation Method for Duty Payment u/s 4(1)(a), Dismisses Additional Demand.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=57230</link>
      <description>Method of Valuation - assessable value adopted for payment of duty is lower than the actual cost of manufacture of said products - there is no flow back of additional consideration - The Apex Court taking note of the fact that when there was no additional consideration and the goods were cleared to independent buyers, upheld the valuation adopted by the assessee under Section 4(1)(a). - Demand set aside - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2021 10:45:32 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=57230</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>