<?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 (7) TMI 202 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50406</link>
    <description>In job-work valuation disputes, the assessable value must follow the governing Supreme Court principle on job-work assessment, and a contrary assumption that job workers are a mere facade cannot justify adopting the principal manufacturer&#039;s sale price. On that basis, the Commissioner&#039;s valuation approach was set aside, with the resulting demand, appropriation and penalties stated to be unsustainable. Where assessments were provisional, they had to be completed and finalised by the jurisdictional proper officer in accordance with law rather than determined finally in the impugned order. The provisional matters were therefore remanded for completion under the prescribed procedure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Aug 2010 15:04:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88886" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (7) TMI 202 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50406</link>
      <description>In job-work valuation disputes, the assessable value must follow the governing Supreme Court principle on job-work assessment, and a contrary assumption that job workers are a mere facade cannot justify adopting the principal manufacturer&#039;s sale price. On that basis, the Commissioner&#039;s valuation approach was set aside, with the resulting demand, appropriation and penalties stated to be unsustainable. Where assessments were provisional, they had to be completed and finalised by the jurisdictional proper officer in accordance with law rather than determined finally in the impugned order. The provisional matters were therefore remanded for completion under the prescribed procedure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50406</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>