<?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 (4) TMI 458 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95844</link>
    <description>Assessable value under Rule 6(b)(ii) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975 is to be computed on manufacturing cost without loading duty paid on inputs, and unsupported rejection of the assessee&#039;s valuation is not sustainable; where reliable material is lacking, fresh determination by the adjudicating authority is required. HDPE and PVC pipes are to be classified by their own nature and ordinary commercial use, and mere use in a sprinkler irrigation arrangement does not make them parts of that system under Heading 84.24. The note states that the valuation issue required remand for reworking, while the classification claim under Heading 84.24 failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 13:38:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132903" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (4) TMI 458 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95844</link>
      <description>Assessable value under Rule 6(b)(ii) of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 1975 is to be computed on manufacturing cost without loading duty paid on inputs, and unsupported rejection of the assessee&#039;s valuation is not sustainable; where reliable material is lacking, fresh determination by the adjudicating authority is required. HDPE and PVC pipes are to be classified by their own nature and ordinary commercial use, and mere use in a sprinkler irrigation arrangement does not make them parts of that system under Heading 84.24. The note states that the valuation issue required remand for reworking, while the classification claim under Heading 84.24 failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95844</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>