<?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>2005 (5) TMI 126 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54104</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner&#039;s order demanding duty payment for the assembly and erection of Multiflex Systems at the site. The Tribunal upheld the appellant&#039;s argument that no fresh excisable goods emerged at the site, and assembly charges should not be included in the assessable value of the systems. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was overturned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 10:28:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92581" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 126 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54104</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner&#039;s order demanding duty payment for the assembly and erection of Multiflex Systems at the site. The Tribunal upheld the appellant&#039;s argument that no fresh excisable goods emerged at the site, and assembly charges should not be included in the assessable value of the systems. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was overturned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54104</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>