<?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 (6) TMI 100 - BEFORE THE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS &amp; CENTRAL EXCISE (</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81802</link>
    <description>Regional discount declared in approved Part VII price lists was deductible from assessable value where it was known at or before removal, and the fact that invoices showed only the net assessable value did not by itself make the discount inadmissible. The Department also failed to show that the discount was not passed on to buyers or that any excess amount had been collected. On that basis, the disallowance of the regional discount was unsustainable and the appeal succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:42:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118947" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (6) TMI 100 - BEFORE THE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS &amp; CENTRAL EXCISE (</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81802</link>
      <description>Regional discount declared in approved Part VII price lists was deductible from assessable value where it was known at or before removal, and the fact that invoices showed only the net assessable value did not by itself make the discount inadmissible. The Department also failed to show that the discount was not passed on to buyers or that any excess amount had been collected. On that basis, the disallowance of the regional discount was unsustainable and the appeal succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81802</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>