<?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>2008 (2) TMI 880 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175999</link>
    <description>Freight or transportation charges separately recovered from buyers are not includible in the assessable value or transaction value of excisable goods when shown separately in invoices. The Tribunal applied the Supreme Court principle that profit earned on extra transport charges does not alter their character as a separate recovery, and held that the same position continues under the amended transaction value regime. It therefore excluded the extra freight from central excise valuation and set aside the impugned order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2017 10:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=408385" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 880 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175999</link>
      <description>Freight or transportation charges separately recovered from buyers are not includible in the assessable value or transaction value of excisable goods when shown separately in invoices. The Tribunal applied the Supreme Court principle that profit earned on extra transport charges does not alter their character as a separate recovery, and held that the same position continues under the amended transaction value regime. It therefore excluded the extra freight from central excise valuation and set aside the impugned order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175999</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>