<?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>2000 (9) TMI 99 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49894</link>
    <description>Third-party reimbursements towards advertising, marketing and sales promotion were held not includible in the assessable value of soft drinks under central excise valuation rules because only consideration flowing from the buyer to the assessee can form part of value. On that basis, the duty demand founded on such inclusion was unsustainable. Penalties also could not survive once the duty demand failed, and the separate penalty on the Director was further criticised for lack of proper identification of the person and the specific offence. The valuation demand and all consequential penalties were therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:32:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88374" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (9) TMI 99 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49894</link>
      <description>Third-party reimbursements towards advertising, marketing and sales promotion were held not includible in the assessable value of soft drinks under central excise valuation rules because only consideration flowing from the buyer to the assessee can form part of value. On that basis, the duty demand founded on such inclusion was unsustainable. Penalties also could not survive once the duty demand failed, and the separate penalty on the Director was further criticised for lack of proper identification of the person and the specific offence. The valuation demand and all consequential penalties were therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49894</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>