<?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 (3) TMI 313 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74089</link>
    <description>Separately invoiced machine attachments supplied at the importer&#039;s instance were not treated as accessories or parts included in the assessable value of the machine because they were not shown to be compulsory standard fittings under the governing conditions. Separate charging and invoicing indicated that the items, including the automatic central lubricating system, were not normal components of the machine, even if they were useful or essential for operation. The fact that the lubricating system replaced a standard component did not change its character, since it was still not established as a standard part supplied with the machine. The claim for inclusion in assessment therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 16:49:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=112368" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (3) TMI 313 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74089</link>
      <description>Separately invoiced machine attachments supplied at the importer&#039;s instance were not treated as accessories or parts included in the assessable value of the machine because they were not shown to be compulsory standard fittings under the governing conditions. Separate charging and invoicing indicated that the items, including the automatic central lubricating system, were not normal components of the machine, even if they were useful or essential for operation. The fact that the lubricating system replaced a standard component did not change its character, since it was still not established as a standard part supplied with the machine. The claim for inclusion in assessment therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74089</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>