<?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>2018 (7) TMI 1713 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364405</link>
    <description>The appeal was dismissed as the Tribunal upheld the decision that the value of packing material supplied by the customer should be included in the assessable value of goods manufactured by the appellant, a Metal Container manufacturer, from February 2007 to September 2007. The Tribunal emphasized that the packing material used in the production process should be considered part of the assessable value, in accordance with Rule 6 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules 2000 and section 4 of the Act. The appellant&#039;s argument that the packing material was not consumed in the manufacturing process was rejected, affirming the inclusion of packing material cost in the assessable value for excise duty purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2018 21:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=528592" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 1713 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364405</link>
      <description>The appeal was dismissed as the Tribunal upheld the decision that the value of packing material supplied by the customer should be included in the assessable value of goods manufactured by the appellant, a Metal Container manufacturer, from February 2007 to September 2007. The Tribunal emphasized that the packing material used in the production process should be considered part of the assessable value, in accordance with Rule 6 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules 2000 and section 4 of the Act. The appellant&#039;s argument that the packing material was not consumed in the manufacturing process was rejected, affirming the inclusion of packing material cost in the assessable value for excise duty purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364405</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>