<?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>2007 (1) TMI 45 -  CESTAT,BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1432</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, ruling in favor of the appellants. It held that excess freight and insurance charges collected from customers should not be included in the assessable value for excise duty. The judgment emphasized that even profits from these activities should not be considered, citing precedent from the Apex Court. Despite delivery at customer premises, the ex-factory price was deemed sufficient for assessment. The Tribunal found no merit in the Orders-in-Appeal, granting relief to the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 18:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40843" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (1) TMI 45 -  CESTAT,BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1432</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, ruling in favor of the appellants. It held that excess freight and insurance charges collected from customers should not be included in the assessable value for excise duty. The judgment emphasized that even profits from these activities should not be considered, citing precedent from the Apex Court. Despite delivery at customer premises, the ex-factory price was deemed sufficient for assessment. The Tribunal found no merit in the Orders-in-Appeal, granting relief to the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1432</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>