<?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>2004 (10) TMI 207 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53511</link>
    <description>For captively consumed goods, assessable value must be determined on the basis of cost of production under CAS-4, and post-manufacture selling and distribution expenses are not includible. The Tribunal accepted that the Board&#039;s revised clarification aligned with its earlier decisions and with the governing valuation principles, and it rejected reliance on an earlier circular that had been modified. It also held that the Department could not ignore the Board&#039;s clarification when it was consistent with law and precedent. Accordingly, additions for selling and marketing expenses and interest were unsustainable, and the duty demand and penalties were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Oct 2010 16:24:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91988" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (10) TMI 207 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53511</link>
      <description>For captively consumed goods, assessable value must be determined on the basis of cost of production under CAS-4, and post-manufacture selling and distribution expenses are not includible. The Tribunal accepted that the Board&#039;s revised clarification aligned with its earlier decisions and with the governing valuation principles, and it rejected reliance on an earlier circular that had been modified. It also held that the Department could not ignore the Board&#039;s clarification when it was consistent with law and precedent. Accordingly, additions for selling and marketing expenses and interest were unsustainable, and the duty demand and penalties were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53511</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>