<?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 (12) TMI 205 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52530</link>
    <description>Statutory jurisdiction under the Central Excise Rules could not be displaced by an administrative office order, so the Commissioner (Appeals), Vadodara retained jurisdiction for the relevant period. Rental charges on bottles and wooden crates were not part of the assessable value because binding precedent treated them as excludible. Notional interest on deposits was likewise excluded from assessable value on the basis of settled precedent. The document therefore reflects the settled position that administrative directions cannot alter statutory jurisdiction, and that returnable-container rental charges and notional interest on deposits are not includible in valuation when precedent so requires.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 13:17:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91007" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (12) TMI 205 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52530</link>
      <description>Statutory jurisdiction under the Central Excise Rules could not be displaced by an administrative office order, so the Commissioner (Appeals), Vadodara retained jurisdiction for the relevant period. Rental charges on bottles and wooden crates were not part of the assessable value because binding precedent treated them as excludible. Notional interest on deposits was likewise excluded from assessable value on the basis of settled precedent. The document therefore reflects the settled position that administrative directions cannot alter statutory jurisdiction, and that returnable-container rental charges and notional interest on deposits are not includible in valuation when precedent so requires.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52530</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>