<?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>1988 (10) TMI 136 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74025</link>
    <description>Trade discounts and rebates are deductible in excise valuation only when they form part of the normal wholesale trade practice and are uniformly available to buyers of the same class; discounts confined to a favoured buyer were treated as non-deductible and excluded from assessable value. Interest-free advances linked to financing arrangements and used to fund raw materials and stock were treated as additional consideration, so the monetary advantage from those advances was added to assessable value. Where the financing agreements and the true pricing arrangement were not disclosed in the price lists, the omission was treated as suppression of material facts, making the extended limitation period available and defeating the time-bar objection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 12:05:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=112304" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (10) TMI 136 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74025</link>
      <description>Trade discounts and rebates are deductible in excise valuation only when they form part of the normal wholesale trade practice and are uniformly available to buyers of the same class; discounts confined to a favoured buyer were treated as non-deductible and excluded from assessable value. Interest-free advances linked to financing arrangements and used to fund raw materials and stock were treated as additional consideration, so the monetary advantage from those advances was added to assessable value. Where the financing agreements and the true pricing arrangement were not disclosed in the price lists, the omission was treated as suppression of material facts, making the extended limitation period available and defeating the time-bar objection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74025</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>