<?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>1987 (2) TMI 517 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184653</link>
    <description>Ship construction contracts with escalation clauses may require valuation under the excise valuation rules where the normal wholesale price is not readily ascertainable. Escalation amounts payable for steel, labour and customs duty were treated as part of the contract price and therefore included in assessable value, because they formed part of the money consideration for the sale. However, where those escalation amounts had not yet been finally quantified and were still pending arbitration, a duty notice based on the escalated amount was held premature and unsustainable. The revenue was left free to proceed if and when the amounts became finally determined and crystallised.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:22:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=435062" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (2) TMI 517 - CEGAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184653</link>
      <description>Ship construction contracts with escalation clauses may require valuation under the excise valuation rules where the normal wholesale price is not readily ascertainable. Escalation amounts payable for steel, labour and customs duty were treated as part of the contract price and therefore included in assessable value, because they formed part of the money consideration for the sale. However, where those escalation amounts had not yet been finally quantified and were still pending arbitration, a duty notice based on the escalated amount was held premature and unsustainable. The revenue was left free to proceed if and when the amounts became finally determined and crystallised.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184653</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>