<?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 (12) TMI 145 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86072</link>
    <description>Goods manufactured on job-work basis from materials supplied by the customer and returned to that supplier are to be valued on a cost-plus basis, namely raw-material cost, labour charges and profit. Rule 6(b) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975 applies only where excisable goods are not sold by the assessee but are used or consumed in the manufacture of another article, so the comparable-goods method was inapplicable here. The costing data already reflected job-work charges covering labour and profit, and the demand was therefore not sustainable. The impugned orders were set aside and the assessee&#039;s valuation was accepted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 10:43:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123139" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (12) TMI 145 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86072</link>
      <description>Goods manufactured on job-work basis from materials supplied by the customer and returned to that supplier are to be valued on a cost-plus basis, namely raw-material cost, labour charges and profit. Rule 6(b) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975 applies only where excisable goods are not sold by the assessee but are used or consumed in the manufacture of another article, so the comparable-goods method was inapplicable here. The costing data already reflected job-work charges covering labour and profit, and the demand was therefore not sustainable. The impugned orders were set aside and the assessee&#039;s valuation was accepted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86072</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>