<?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 331 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85923</link>
    <description>Post-manufacture delivery charges for transporting filled and empty bottles, interest earned on returnable crate deposits, and hire charges for bottles and crates were treated as ancillary amounts lacking nexus with manufacture, and were excluded from assessable value. The demand on those components did not survive. The service charges issue required de novo examination because the record suggested possible inclusion of promotional and support activities and needed itemwise scrutiny. In view of the substantial relief and remand, the confiscation order was set aside, while penalty was left to be reconsidered in the remand proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 10:57:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122990" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (9) TMI 331 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85923</link>
      <description>Post-manufacture delivery charges for transporting filled and empty bottles, interest earned on returnable crate deposits, and hire charges for bottles and crates were treated as ancillary amounts lacking nexus with manufacture, and were excluded from assessable value. The demand on those components did not survive. The service charges issue required de novo examination because the record suggested possible inclusion of promotional and support activities and needed itemwise scrutiny. In view of the substantial relief and remand, the confiscation order was set aside, while penalty was left to be reconsidered in the remand proceedings.</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=85923</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>