<?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>2009 (7) TMI 1122 - COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), PUNE-II</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152417</link>
    <description>Post-clearance laying and jointing charges for PSC pipes were treated as post-manufacturing expenses and excluded from assessable value because they were incurred after removal from the factory. The value of bought-out rubber rings was also excluded, as they were supplied after clearance and not fitted in the factory before removal. Since the resulting water pipeline was embedded in earth and amounted to immovable property rather than a new excisable commodity, the valuation demand failed; the related interest and penalty could not survive once the underlying duty demand was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2013 10:35:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169455" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 1122 - COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), PUNE-II</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152417</link>
      <description>Post-clearance laying and jointing charges for PSC pipes were treated as post-manufacturing expenses and excluded from assessable value because they were incurred after removal from the factory. The value of bought-out rubber rings was also excluded, as they were supplied after clearance and not fitted in the factory before removal. Since the resulting water pipeline was embedded in earth and amounted to immovable property rather than a new excisable commodity, the valuation demand failed; the related interest and penalty could not survive once the underlying duty demand was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152417</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>