https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89853 Refund was denied where the assessee failed to prove that freight, transit insurance and secondary packing charges were actually excluded from assessable value. The claim that deductions omitted from the price list could still be sought by refund was rejected, but the decisive defect was lack of proof of the actual expenditure. A chartered accountant's certificate based only on books of account was insufficient, and the relevant primary records were not produced despite repeated requests. Packing in corrugated or wooden boxes was treated as necessary for sale and transport in the absence of contrary evidence. The assessee therefore did not establish entitlement to exclusion of the claimed amounts. en-us Thu, 03 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Sep 2011 11:22:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89853 Refund was denied where the assessee failed to prove that freight, transit insurance and secondary packing charges were actually excluded from assessable value. The claim that deductions omitted from the price list could still be sought by refund was rejected, but the decisive defect was lack of proof of the actual expenditure. A chartered accountant's certificate based only on books of account was insufficient, and the relevant primary records were not produced despite repeated requests. Packing in corrugated or wooden boxes was treated as necessary for sale and transport in the absence of contrary evidence. The assessee therefore did not establish entitlement to exclusion of the claimed amounts. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 03 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89853