<?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>1997 (1) TMI 167 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86217</link>
    <description>An exemption notification for patent or proprietary medicines allowed two alternative valuation bases: wholesale price with a 10% discount or retail price with a 25% discount. The manufacturer&#039;s choice was not controlled by whether sales were actually made in wholesale trade, because the notification contained no qualifying words tying the election to the mode of sale. The only condition for the retail-price basis was that medicines sold at retail be priced at or below the specified limit, and no finding showed that this condition was breached. The manufacturer could therefore adopt the retail-price basis with the 25% discount, and a duty demand confined to the wholesale-price basis was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 15:20:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123284" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (1) TMI 167 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86217</link>
      <description>An exemption notification for patent or proprietary medicines allowed two alternative valuation bases: wholesale price with a 10% discount or retail price with a 25% discount. The manufacturer&#039;s choice was not controlled by whether sales were actually made in wholesale trade, because the notification contained no qualifying words tying the election to the mode of sale. The only condition for the retail-price basis was that medicines sold at retail be priced at or below the specified limit, and no finding showed that this condition was breached. The manufacturer could therefore adopt the retail-price basis with the 25% discount, and a duty demand confined to the wholesale-price basis was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86217</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>