<?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>1990 (4) TMI 179 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82881</link>
    <description>In a composite contract for manufacture, transport, laying and jointing, testing, and maintenance, only the manufacturing cost and profit formed the assessable value of the pipes. Transportation from the factory gate to the site was treated as a separate post-clearance element and excluded from valuation. Laying and jointing, testing, and maintenance were likewise treated as post-manufacturing activities, not part of the manufacturing process. Because the execution-work elements were severable from the value of the manufactured goods, the disputed charges were not includible in assessable value, and the value was to be redetermined accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 18:30:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120026" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (4) TMI 179 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82881</link>
      <description>In a composite contract for manufacture, transport, laying and jointing, testing, and maintenance, only the manufacturing cost and profit formed the assessable value of the pipes. Transportation from the factory gate to the site was treated as a separate post-clearance element and excluded from valuation. Laying and jointing, testing, and maintenance were likewise treated as post-manufacturing activities, not part of the manufacturing process. Because the execution-work elements were severable from the value of the manufactured goods, the disputed charges were not includible in assessable value, and the value was to be redetermined accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82881</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>