<?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 (12) TMI 324 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88101</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the excess insurance premium retained by the appellant should not be included in the assessable value of motor scooters and auto-rickshaws. It was determined that excise duty is imposed on the manufacturer, not on profits from transportation, aligning with the Supreme Court precedent. The appeal was allowed, overturning the order that included the surplus amount in the assessable value, emphasizing the application of legal principles in excise matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2011 10:53:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125167" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (12) TMI 324 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88101</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the excess insurance premium retained by the appellant should not be included in the assessable value of motor scooters and auto-rickshaws. It was determined that excise duty is imposed on the manufacturer, not on profits from transportation, aligning with the Supreme Court precedent. The appeal was allowed, overturning the order that included the surplus amount in the assessable value, emphasizing the application of legal principles in excise matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88101</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>