<?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>1976 (6) TMI 69 - Bombay High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165542</link>
    <description>Excise duty on tractors was held to be confined to the value of the manufactured tractor as the excisable article, and not to include optional accessories fitted before clearance. Hour meters and wheel weights were found to be non-essential components, separately exempt from duty, and supplied only at the purchaser&#039;s option; their pre-removal attachment did not justify adding their value to the tractor&#039;s assessable value. The time of clearance fixes valuation, but it does not permit inclusion of exempt accessory value where the levy would otherwise extend beyond the excisable goods themselves. The impugned excise demands and appellate orders were therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2014 16:04:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=361013" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (6) TMI 69 - Bombay High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165542</link>
      <description>Excise duty on tractors was held to be confined to the value of the manufactured tractor as the excisable article, and not to include optional accessories fitted before clearance. Hour meters and wheel weights were found to be non-essential components, separately exempt from duty, and supplied only at the purchaser&#039;s option; their pre-removal attachment did not justify adding their value to the tractor&#039;s assessable value. The time of clearance fixes valuation, but it does not permit inclusion of exempt accessory value where the levy would otherwise extend beyond the excisable goods themselves. The impugned excise demands and appellate orders were therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165542</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>