<?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 (7) TMI 330 - CEGAT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166695</link>
    <description>Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 applied only to material, component parts or finished products brought into the factory for manufacture of excisable goods or for more convenient distribution of the finished product. Wrapping paper used to pack other paper varieties was not brought in for its own convenient distribution, but for packing goods after manufacture. Packing was treated as a post-manufacturing process, not an incidental or ancillary step in completing manufacture. The reference to packing cost in valuation under Section 4 did not change that position, because the issue was not double assessment of the same goods under the same tariff entry. Proforma credit was therefore not available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 30 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2014 14:34:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=367810" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (7) TMI 330 - CEGAT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166695</link>
      <description>Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 applied only to material, component parts or finished products brought into the factory for manufacture of excisable goods or for more convenient distribution of the finished product. Wrapping paper used to pack other paper varieties was not brought in for its own convenient distribution, but for packing goods after manufacture. Packing was treated as a post-manufacturing process, not an incidental or ancillary step in completing manufacture. The reference to packing cost in valuation under Section 4 did not change that position, because the issue was not double assessment of the same goods under the same tariff entry. Proforma credit was therefore not available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 30 Jul 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166695</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>