<?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>2011 (3) TMI 851 - CESTAT, DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207791</link>
    <description>Charges recovered separately from customers toward die research, development, and related tooling are includible in the assessable value of the final product for central excise. The text states that such expenditure forms part of the intrinsic value of the excisable goods because dies, moulds, research, development, and technological inputs used in manufacture contribute to production value, whether recovered through debit notes or reflected in invoices. Separate recovery or claimed amortisation does not justify exclusion where the charges are linked to manufacture and were not properly disclosed. On that reasoning, the duty demand was treated as sustainable and the exclusion claim was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2022 14:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181265" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 851 - CESTAT, DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207791</link>
      <description>Charges recovered separately from customers toward die research, development, and related tooling are includible in the assessable value of the final product for central excise. The text states that such expenditure forms part of the intrinsic value of the excisable goods because dies, moulds, research, development, and technological inputs used in manufacture contribute to production value, whether recovered through debit notes or reflected in invoices. Separate recovery or claimed amortisation does not justify exclusion where the charges are linked to manufacture and were not properly disclosed. On that reasoning, the duty demand was treated as sustainable and the exclusion claim was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207791</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>