https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218056 The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the Department's demand to include travelling expenses in the assessable value for excise duty calculation was not legally sustainable. The Tribunal emphasized the distinction between manufacturing costs and post-manufacturing activities, stating that charges for supervision during erection and commissioning at the customer's site should not be part of the transaction value under the Central Excise Act. The appellant was granted consequential relief, highlighting the necessity of a clear nexus between charges and the goods' transaction value for excise duty calculation. en-us Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Aug 2012 17:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218056 The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the Department's demand to include travelling expenses in the assessable value for excise duty calculation was not legally sustainable. The Tribunal emphasized the distinction between manufacturing costs and post-manufacturing activities, stating that charges for supervision during erection and commissioning at the customer's site should not be part of the transaction value under the Central Excise Act. The appellant was granted consequential relief, highlighting the necessity of a clear nexus between charges and the goods' transaction value for excise duty calculation. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218056