<?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 (10) TMI 41 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1060</link>
    <description>First-aid kit/box supplied with motor vehicles was treated as an accessory cleared along with the final product and therefore as an input eligible for Modvat/Cenvat credit. The analysis relied on the credit provisions then in force, which covered accessories supplied with the final product, and on the fact that the kit&#039;s value formed part of the vehicles&#039; assessable value. The statutory motor vehicle scheme was also read as recognising the safety function of first-aid equipment in vehicles. The manufacturer&#039;s lack of an absolute obligation to supply the kit, or the possibility of sourcing it elsewhere, was regarded as irrelevant where it was in fact supplied with the vehicle.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 05:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40475" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (10) TMI 41 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1060</link>
      <description>First-aid kit/box supplied with motor vehicles was treated as an accessory cleared along with the final product and therefore as an input eligible for Modvat/Cenvat credit. The analysis relied on the credit provisions then in force, which covered accessories supplied with the final product, and on the fact that the kit&#039;s value formed part of the vehicles&#039; assessable value. The statutory motor vehicle scheme was also read as recognising the safety function of first-aid equipment in vehicles. The manufacturer&#039;s lack of an absolute obligation to supply the kit, or the possibility of sourcing it elsewhere, was regarded as irrelevant where it was in fact supplied with the vehicle.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1060</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>