<?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>2002 (12) TMI 517 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108775</link>
    <description>Tooling cost was treated as part of the assessable value of finished goods, but apportionment had to follow the expected life and productive capability of the tools rather than a simple depreciation method; the assessee succeeded on this point. A duty demand based on shortages of components not entered in the RG-I register was sustained only to the extent of the proved shortage, with the balance disallowed. Penalty and confiscation were examined on the factual record: the company&#039;s penalty was reduced, the director&#039;s penalty was set aside for want of adjudicatory findings on his role, and confiscation of land, building, plant and machinery was not sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2012 18:01:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145792" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (12) TMI 517 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108775</link>
      <description>Tooling cost was treated as part of the assessable value of finished goods, but apportionment had to follow the expected life and productive capability of the tools rather than a simple depreciation method; the assessee succeeded on this point. A duty demand based on shortages of components not entered in the RG-I register was sustained only to the extent of the proved shortage, with the balance disallowed. Penalty and confiscation were examined on the factual record: the company&#039;s penalty was reduced, the director&#039;s penalty was set aside for want of adjudicatory findings on his role, and confiscation of land, building, plant and machinery was not sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108775</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>