<?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>1994 (2) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83205</link>
    <description>Delivery charges incurred for transportation beyond the factory gate were treated as post-manufacturing expenses and excluded from excisable value under Section 4, while container recovery and retention charges for empty bottles and crates were also excluded as post-clearance recoveries. Advertisement and publicity charges were held includible in assessable value because no prior agreement or buyer request was shown to justify exclusion. The extended period of limitation was sustained since the deductions were not disclosed in the price lists, but the penalty was set aside. Duty was therefore confined to the includible advertisement charges, and recomputation of assessable value was directed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 16:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120350" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (2) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83205</link>
      <description>Delivery charges incurred for transportation beyond the factory gate were treated as post-manufacturing expenses and excluded from excisable value under Section 4, while container recovery and retention charges for empty bottles and crates were also excluded as post-clearance recoveries. Advertisement and publicity charges were held includible in assessable value because no prior agreement or buyer request was shown to justify exclusion. The extended period of limitation was sustained since the deductions were not disclosed in the price lists, but the penalty was set aside. Duty was therefore confined to the includible advertisement charges, and recomputation of assessable value was directed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83205</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>