<?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>1983 (5) TMI 246 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166188</link>
    <description>Packing or wrapping cost necessary for sale forms part of the assessable value of excisable goods, and a separately manufactured wrapper remains independently liable to central excise duty when it is itself a marketable commodity. On that basis, the full cost of wrapper paper, including excise duty already paid on it, was treated as includible in the value of the wrapped paper, and the double taxation objection was rejected because the levy applied to different goods in different capacities. The earlier demand was treated as time-barred in the absence of proof of provisional assessment, but no refund was granted on the facts recorded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2014 11:59:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=364051" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (5) TMI 246 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166188</link>
      <description>Packing or wrapping cost necessary for sale forms part of the assessable value of excisable goods, and a separately manufactured wrapper remains independently liable to central excise duty when it is itself a marketable commodity. On that basis, the full cost of wrapper paper, including excise duty already paid on it, was treated as includible in the value of the wrapped paper, and the double taxation objection was rejected because the levy applied to different goods in different capacities. The earlier demand was treated as time-barred in the absence of proof of provisional assessment, but no refund was granted on the facts recorded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166188</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>