<?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>2000 (9) TMI 461 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94921</link>
    <description>Notional profit could not be added to job-work charges for valuing manufactured goods where the quotation already included a normal profit margin. The computation of notional profit had not been independently established, and the term &quot;profit&quot; was capable of different meanings. On that material, the assessee&#039;s position that the job charges already reflected profit could not be rejected unless the department disproved it. The valuation adopted by the lower authority was therefore unsustainable, and the addition of notional profit was disallowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 17:53:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131980" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (9) TMI 461 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94921</link>
      <description>Notional profit could not be added to job-work charges for valuing manufactured goods where the quotation already included a normal profit margin. The computation of notional profit had not been independently established, and the term &quot;profit&quot; was capable of different meanings. On that material, the assessee&#039;s position that the job charges already reflected profit could not be rejected unless the department disproved it. The valuation adopted by the lower authority was therefore unsustainable, and the addition of notional profit was disallowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Sep 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94921</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>