<?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>2003 (8) TMI 549 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186860</link>
    <description>Trade discount allowed in accordance with normal wholesale practice is excluded from assessable value, and the decisive factor is the discount actually allowed by the assessee rather than the precise arithmetical method used to compute it. The dispute over the unit quantity discount calculation was therefore treated as irrelevant to valuation. On that basis, the duty demand raised on an alternative computation method was not sustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2016 13:19:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=443557" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (8) TMI 549 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186860</link>
      <description>Trade discount allowed in accordance with normal wholesale practice is excluded from assessable value, and the decisive factor is the discount actually allowed by the assessee rather than the precise arithmetical method used to compute it. The dispute over the unit quantity discount calculation was therefore treated as irrelevant to valuation. On that basis, the duty demand raised on an alternative computation method was not sustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186860</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>