<?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 (5) TMI 174 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86964</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, ruled that notional interest on deposits should not be included in the assessable value of goods manufactured and cleared by the assessees. The Tribunal emphasized the need for concrete evidence to establish a direct influence of advance deposits on the value of excisable goods. Aligning with previous decisions and Supreme Court rulings, the Tribunal held that the burden of proof rests on the department to demonstrate any impact on pricing. Without sufficient evidence linking advance deposits to pricing, notional interest should not be considered in determining the assessable value of goods. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 16:10:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124031" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (5) TMI 174 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86964</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, ruled that notional interest on deposits should not be included in the assessable value of goods manufactured and cleared by the assessees. The Tribunal emphasized the need for concrete evidence to establish a direct influence of advance deposits on the value of excisable goods. Aligning with previous decisions and Supreme Court rulings, the Tribunal held that the burden of proof rests on the department to demonstrate any impact on pricing. Without sufficient evidence linking advance deposits to pricing, notional interest should not be considered in determining the assessable value of goods. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>