<?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>2026 (2) TMI 516 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786368</link>
    <description>Freight recovered from buyers at a consignment agent&#039;s depot was not includible in the assessable value where goods were cleared on a freight-to-pay basis and the freight was borne by the buyers, not the manufacturer. Applying Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the valuation rules for sales through depots or consignment agents, the Tribunal followed its earlier decisions in the assessee&#039;s own case and held that the freight element could not be added. The Tribunal also relied on judicial discipline and consistency, noting the absence of any stay or contrary higher-court ruling. The demand, penalty, and consequential levy were therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2026 09:03:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=885968" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 516 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786368</link>
      <description>Freight recovered from buyers at a consignment agent&#039;s depot was not includible in the assessable value where goods were cleared on a freight-to-pay basis and the freight was borne by the buyers, not the manufacturer. Applying Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the valuation rules for sales through depots or consignment agents, the Tribunal followed its earlier decisions in the assessee&#039;s own case and held that the freight element could not be added. The Tribunal also relied on judicial discipline and consistency, noting the absence of any stay or contrary higher-court ruling. The demand, penalty, and consequential levy were therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786368</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>