<?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>2004 (4) TMI 352 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111573</link>
    <description>The assessable value of manufactured Pistons and G. Pins did not include the value of separately bought-out Circlips and Rings supplied with them, because those items were not shown to be parts of the manufactured goods themselves and were only required for assembly in the engine. The Revenue&#039;s reliance on a heading covering parts suitable for use with the relevant engines was rejected, as it did not cover an assembly arrangement. An earlier decision on identical facts was treated as governing the controversy, while the precedent concerning bought-out items supplied as part of excisable goods was found inapplicable. The assessee&#039;s position was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2012 11:31:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148589" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 352 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111573</link>
      <description>The assessable value of manufactured Pistons and G. Pins did not include the value of separately bought-out Circlips and Rings supplied with them, because those items were not shown to be parts of the manufactured goods themselves and were only required for assembly in the engine. The Revenue&#039;s reliance on a heading covering parts suitable for use with the relevant engines was rejected, as it did not cover an assembly arrangement. An earlier decision on identical facts was treated as governing the controversy, while the precedent concerning bought-out items supplied as part of excisable goods was found inapplicable. The assessee&#039;s position was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111573</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>