<?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>1991 (7) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81411</link>
    <description>Proto-type transmission line towers cleared in completely knocked down condition for testing were held not marketable and therefore not excisable goods, because marketability is an essential ingredient of excisability. Testing charges recovered under the contract were nevertheless includible in the assessable value, as they were incurred in relation to the contracted towers before delivery. The extended period of limitation could not be invoked, since the records disclosed the charges, there was no conscious suppression or wilful withholding of information, and the assessee acted under a bona fide belief. The demand was therefore set aside overall on the excisability and limitation issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 15:00:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118556" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (7) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81411</link>
      <description>Proto-type transmission line towers cleared in completely knocked down condition for testing were held not marketable and therefore not excisable goods, because marketability is an essential ingredient of excisability. Testing charges recovered under the contract were nevertheless includible in the assessable value, as they were incurred in relation to the contracted towers before delivery. The extended period of limitation could not be invoked, since the records disclosed the charges, there was no conscious suppression or wilful withholding of information, and the assessee acted under a bona fide belief. The demand was therefore set aside overall on the excisability and limitation issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81411</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>