<?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 (6) TMI 473 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97000</link>
    <description>The assessable value of the ingot buggy for central excise included only the value of the excisable manufactured product, not the cost of bought-out items used for laying the foundation on which the buggy moved. The foundation was treated as immovable property, so expenses incurred for erecting it, or for items used in that post-manufacture activity, could not be added to the buggy&#039;s assessable value. On that basis, the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 16:02:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134058" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (6) TMI 473 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97000</link>
      <description>The assessable value of the ingot buggy for central excise included only the value of the excisable manufactured product, not the cost of bought-out items used for laying the foundation on which the buggy moved. The foundation was treated as immovable property, so expenses incurred for erecting it, or for items used in that post-manufacture activity, could not be added to the buggy&#039;s assessable value. On that basis, the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97000</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>