<?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>2024 (10) TMI 1627 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460145</link>
    <description>Omission to adjudicate a recorded request for cum-duty benefit was treated as a mistake apparent from the record and was corrected through rectification. On merits, the invoice price was examined and found to already include the duty component, so the assessable value had to be treated as cum-duty. The result was that the earlier final order was modified to extend cum-duty relief, with the duty demand restricted accordingly and consequential interest maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:56:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=788626" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 1627 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460145</link>
      <description>Omission to adjudicate a recorded request for cum-duty benefit was treated as a mistake apparent from the record and was corrected through rectification. On merits, the invoice price was examined and found to already include the duty component, so the assessable value had to be treated as cum-duty. The result was that the earlier final order was modified to extend cum-duty relief, with the duty demand restricted accordingly and consequential interest maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460145</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>