<?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>2003 (6) TMI 121 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52209</link>
    <description>Captively consumed yarn was valued by reference to the ex-factory sale price of similar yarn because the yarn was partly sold at the factory gate and partly used internally. The valuation rules were treated as residual and inapplicable where value could be determined under the general excise valuation provision; Rule 6(b) was also held inapplicable because it applies to goods not sold, unlike a partly sold product. The factory-gate price, including post-spindle stage expenses, was therefore sustained as the valuation basis. The equal penalty was found excessive on the facts and was substantially reduced, leaving the duty demand intact but granting limited relief on penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 11:57:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (6) TMI 121 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52209</link>
      <description>Captively consumed yarn was valued by reference to the ex-factory sale price of similar yarn because the yarn was partly sold at the factory gate and partly used internally. The valuation rules were treated as residual and inapplicable where value could be determined under the general excise valuation provision; Rule 6(b) was also held inapplicable because it applies to goods not sold, unlike a partly sold product. The factory-gate price, including post-spindle stage expenses, was therefore sustained as the valuation basis. The equal penalty was found excessive on the facts and was substantially reduced, leaving the duty demand intact but granting limited relief on penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52209</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>