<?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 (4) TMI 177 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54237</link>
    <description>Reimbursement received under an administered price-support mechanism was not treated as part of the assessable value because it was not additional consideration from the buyer; the valuation addition was therefore rejected in favour of the assessee. As clearances were made under invoices and the department was aware of the facts, suppression and mens rea were not established, so the extended limitation period, fine, and penalty were also held unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside and consequential relief followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:07:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92714" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (4) TMI 177 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54237</link>
      <description>Reimbursement received under an administered price-support mechanism was not treated as part of the assessable value because it was not additional consideration from the buyer; the valuation addition was therefore rejected in favour of the assessee. As clearances were made under invoices and the department was aware of the facts, suppression and mens rea were not established, so the extended limitation period, fine, and penalty were also held unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside and consequential relief followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54237</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>