<?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 (12) TMI 158 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73489</link>
    <description>For goods captively consumed, valuation under section 4(1)(b) read with rule 6(b) must reflect the cost of production of the excisable product at the relevant manufacturing stage, together with reasonable profit. Post-manufacture cutting charges from sheet to strip were treated as outside the production cost of camel back, and unrelated administrative overheads were likewise excluded from the cost base. The analysis stressed that the product was assessed at the sheet stage, so later conversion expenses could not be added unless they formed part of that stage&#039;s manufacture. The exclusion of those items from valuation was therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Dec 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 13:15:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=111768" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (12) TMI 158 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73489</link>
      <description>For goods captively consumed, valuation under section 4(1)(b) read with rule 6(b) must reflect the cost of production of the excisable product at the relevant manufacturing stage, together with reasonable profit. Post-manufacture cutting charges from sheet to strip were treated as outside the production cost of camel back, and unrelated administrative overheads were likewise excluded from the cost base. The analysis stressed that the product was assessed at the sheet stage, so later conversion expenses could not be added unless they formed part of that stage&#039;s manufacture. The exclusion of those items from valuation was therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Dec 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73489</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>