<?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>1992 (3) TMI 175 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81706</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, ruled on the allowability of deductions claimed by the appellants related to expenses in a soap manufacturing agreement. The Collector disallowed some deductions but allowed others. The Tribunal upheld the Collector&#039;s decision to exclude handling expenses and remuneration to agents from the assessable value. It directed the Collector to determine the necessity of special secondary packing for goods&#039; sale condition and allowed a discount for damages. The Tribunal also permitted the turnover tax deduction, aligning with Supreme Court precedent. The decision clarified the inclusion/exclusion of costs in excise duty calculations, dismissing the department&#039;s appeal and modifying in favor of the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 13:15:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118851" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (3) TMI 175 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81706</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, ruled on the allowability of deductions claimed by the appellants related to expenses in a soap manufacturing agreement. The Collector disallowed some deductions but allowed others. The Tribunal upheld the Collector&#039;s decision to exclude handling expenses and remuneration to agents from the assessable value. It directed the Collector to determine the necessity of special secondary packing for goods&#039; sale condition and allowed a discount for damages. The Tribunal also permitted the turnover tax deduction, aligning with Supreme Court precedent. The decision clarified the inclusion/exclusion of costs in excise duty calculations, dismissing the department&#039;s appeal and modifying in favor of the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81706</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>