<?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>1987 (1) TMI 216 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72698</link>
    <description>Packing and assembling separately manufactured components into completed twink inframatic cuisinette and twink simmermatic cuisinette was treated as manufacture because the parts were brought together in matched combinations, fitted with accessories, and marketed as new completed units with a distinct ensemble character and utility. Under Central Excise principles, manufacture is not confined to physical transformation and may include creation of a new commodity in the form in which it leaves the depot. The Tribunal also regarded the arrangement as a tax-avoidance device. The completed units were therefore assessable under Tariff Item 33C, and the duty demand and penalty were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 14:28:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=110977" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (1) TMI 216 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72698</link>
      <description>Packing and assembling separately manufactured components into completed twink inframatic cuisinette and twink simmermatic cuisinette was treated as manufacture because the parts were brought together in matched combinations, fitted with accessories, and marketed as new completed units with a distinct ensemble character and utility. Under Central Excise principles, manufacture is not confined to physical transformation and may include creation of a new commodity in the form in which it leaves the depot. The Tribunal also regarded the arrangement as a tax-avoidance device. The completed units were therefore assessable under Tariff Item 33C, and the duty demand and penalty were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72698</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>