<?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>2008 (7) TMI 628 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123732</link>
    <description>Charges for post-clearance erection, commissioning and supervision recovered under separate contracts are not part of the assessable value of excisable goods because they relate to activities after manufacture and clearance. On that principle, supervision charges linked to such post-clearance work are equally excludible. The inclusion of these charges in assessable value was therefore unsustainable, and the demand based on that inclusion could not be maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2012 17:34:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160693" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 628 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123732</link>
      <description>Charges for post-clearance erection, commissioning and supervision recovered under separate contracts are not part of the assessable value of excisable goods because they relate to activities after manufacture and clearance. On that principle, supervision charges linked to such post-clearance work are equally excludible. The inclusion of these charges in assessable value was therefore unsustainable, and the demand based on that inclusion could not be maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123732</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>