<?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>2017 (12) TMI 277 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352008</link>
    <description>Additional packing in wooden boxes or crates used only for safe outstation transportation does not form part of the assessable value of finished goods. Packing charges are includible only where the packing represents the ordinary manner in which goods are sold. Primary packing sufficient for normal clearance remains relevant to valuation, while secondary transport-protection packing is excluded. Wooden packing required as normal packing for fragile goods is distinguishable from packing used exceptionally and solely to prevent transit damage. The additional packing cost was therefore excluded from assessable value, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Jul 2018 14:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=498738" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 277 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352008</link>
      <description>Additional packing in wooden boxes or crates used only for safe outstation transportation does not form part of the assessable value of finished goods. Packing charges are includible only where the packing represents the ordinary manner in which goods are sold. Primary packing sufficient for normal clearance remains relevant to valuation, while secondary transport-protection packing is excluded. Wooden packing required as normal packing for fragile goods is distinguishable from packing used exceptionally and solely to prevent transit damage. The additional packing cost was therefore excluded from assessable value, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352008</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>