<?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>1996 (9) TMI 277 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85807</link>
    <description>In job-work processing, assessable value is confined to the grey cloth, job-work charges, processing expenses and the processor&#039;s profit; the buyers&#039; resale price cannot be used where it includes post-processing additions. The relationship between the supplying firms and the purchasing company was treated as non-arm&#039;s length because of close family control and common business interest, so the transactions were not accepted as genuine principal-to-principal dealings. Cash discount available under the sale terms and uniformly available incentive bonus were deductible, and post-processing expenses could not be loaded into valuation. On that basis, the confiscation and penalty based on the erroneous valuation were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2011 12:44:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122874" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (9) TMI 277 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85807</link>
      <description>In job-work processing, assessable value is confined to the grey cloth, job-work charges, processing expenses and the processor&#039;s profit; the buyers&#039; resale price cannot be used where it includes post-processing additions. The relationship between the supplying firms and the purchasing company was treated as non-arm&#039;s length because of close family control and common business interest, so the transactions were not accepted as genuine principal-to-principal dealings. Cash discount available under the sale terms and uniformly available incentive bonus were deductible, and post-processing expenses could not be loaded into valuation. On that basis, the confiscation and penalty based on the erroneous valuation were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85807</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>