https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337066 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the packing charges should not be included in the assessable value of goods. It found that the packing was specifically requested by the buyer for safe transportation, not for marketing purposes, aligning with a Supreme Court judgment. The contract terms clearly indicated the need for packing to ensure safe transport, leading the Tribunal to conclude that the charges were not part of the assessable value. The decision was based on distinguishing between packing for transportation and marketing, ultimately allowing the appeal and setting aside the previous order. en-us Thu, 01 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Jan 2017 10:51:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337066 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the packing charges should not be included in the assessable value of goods. It found that the packing was specifically requested by the buyer for safe transportation, not for marketing purposes, aligning with a Supreme Court judgment. The contract terms clearly indicated the need for packing to ensure safe transport, leading the Tribunal to conclude that the charges were not part of the assessable value. The decision was based on distinguishing between packing for transportation and marketing, ultimately allowing the appeal and setting aside the previous order. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 01 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337066