<?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>2014 (6) TMI 760 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248856</link>
    <description>The court rejected the revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming that Pre-Delivery Inspection (PDI) charges incurred at the buyer&#039;s instance are not to be included in the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The decision was based on established legal precedents distinguishing between compulsory PDI by the manufacturer and inspections at the buyer&#039;s request. The respondent&#039;s cross objection was allowed, and the revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, in line with previous case law interpretations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2014 12:07:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=358146" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 760 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248856</link>
      <description>The court rejected the revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming that Pre-Delivery Inspection (PDI) charges incurred at the buyer&#039;s instance are not to be included in the assessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The decision was based on established legal precedents distinguishing between compulsory PDI by the manufacturer and inspections at the buyer&#039;s request. The respondent&#039;s cross objection was allowed, and the revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed, in line with previous case law interpretations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248856</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>