<?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>1974 (5) TMI 112 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165580</link>
    <description>For excise valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, the relevant assessable value is the wholesale cash price at the factory gate, confined to manufacturing cost and manufacturing profit and excluding post-manufacturing elements such as selling profit. Bulk sales to customer companies under long-term commercial arrangements did not, by themselves, lose their wholesale character, and the Department could not substitute the buyers&#039; resale price absent evidence of secret arrangements, understatement, or extra-commercial advantage. The text also states that relief was declined against the earliest excise order because it was not challenged within a reasonable time and was treated as acquiesced in.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Aug 2014 10:33:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=361143" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (5) TMI 112 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165580</link>
      <description>For excise valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, the relevant assessable value is the wholesale cash price at the factory gate, confined to manufacturing cost and manufacturing profit and excluding post-manufacturing elements such as selling profit. Bulk sales to customer companies under long-term commercial arrangements did not, by themselves, lose their wholesale character, and the Department could not substitute the buyers&#039; resale price absent evidence of secret arrangements, understatement, or extra-commercial advantage. The text also states that relief was declined against the earliest excise order because it was not challenged within a reasonable time and was treated as acquiesced in.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165580</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>