<?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>2006 (8) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=525</link>
    <description>For captively consumed goods not sold in the market, assessable value under Rule 6(b)(ii) is confined to cost of production or manufacture determined on accepted accountancy principles, together with admissible profit. That cost includes direct material, direct labour, direct expenses and manufacturing overheads actually entering the intermediate goods, but excludes selling and post-manufacture expenses attributable to the final product, such as advertising, insurance and administration. The accounting standard recognised by the professional body and the departmental circular support this valuation approach, so the additional expenses proposed by the Department were not includible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2019 11:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (8) TMI 2 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=525</link>
      <description>For captively consumed goods not sold in the market, assessable value under Rule 6(b)(ii) is confined to cost of production or manufacture determined on accepted accountancy principles, together with admissible profit. That cost includes direct material, direct labour, direct expenses and manufacturing overheads actually entering the intermediate goods, but excludes selling and post-manufacture expenses attributable to the final product, such as advertising, insurance and administration. The accounting standard recognised by the professional body and the departmental circular support this valuation approach, so the additional expenses proposed by the Department were not includible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=525</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>