<?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>1980 (3) TMI 253 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165645</link>
    <description>Excise valuation under Section 4 required the assessable value to reflect manufacturing cost and manufacturing profit, not post-manufacturing selling elements. For the unamended provision, sales to selling agents at the packing station were treated as genuine wholesale sales at the factory gate, and post-manufacturing expenses such as selling costs could be deducted subject to factual verification and proper apportionment. Under the amended provision, the same constitutional principle continued to apply: the amendment was read as addressing manipulative related-person sales, not as authorising inclusion of freight, octroi, insurance, service charges or other post-manufacturing expenses in assessable value absent clear legislative intent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:36:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=361352" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (3) TMI 253 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165645</link>
      <description>Excise valuation under Section 4 required the assessable value to reflect manufacturing cost and manufacturing profit, not post-manufacturing selling elements. For the unamended provision, sales to selling agents at the packing station were treated as genuine wholesale sales at the factory gate, and post-manufacturing expenses such as selling costs could be deducted subject to factual verification and proper apportionment. Under the amended provision, the same constitutional principle continued to apply: the amendment was read as addressing manipulative related-person sales, not as authorising inclusion of freight, octroi, insurance, service charges or other post-manufacturing expenses in assessable value absent clear legislative intent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165645</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>