<?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>1998 (7) TMI 229 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89320</link>
    <description>Training and programming charges are not includible in assessable value where there is no evidence of a dummy concern, flow-back of receipts, mutuality of interest, or any nexus showing that the charges formed part of the manufacturing value chain; such charges were treated as post-manufacturing expenses. Clandestine removal, however, may be sustained where the record contains corroborative statements from the managing partner, dealers and buyers, documentary irregularities, and other supporting material beyond isolated private records, especially where the alleged removal is not effectively rebutted. The note therefore reflects exclusion of training/programming charges from valuation but acceptance of the clandestine removal demand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 12:34:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126382" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (7) TMI 229 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89320</link>
      <description>Training and programming charges are not includible in assessable value where there is no evidence of a dummy concern, flow-back of receipts, mutuality of interest, or any nexus showing that the charges formed part of the manufacturing value chain; such charges were treated as post-manufacturing expenses. Clandestine removal, however, may be sustained where the record contains corroborative statements from the managing partner, dealers and buyers, documentary irregularities, and other supporting material beyond isolated private records, especially where the alleged removal is not effectively rebutted. The note therefore reflects exclusion of training/programming charges from valuation but acceptance of the clandestine removal demand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89320</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>