<?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 (8) TMI 1784 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279445</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the orders of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in a case concerning the inclusion of transportation charges in the assessable value of excisable goods. It was determined that since the buyers bore the transportation charges and the manufacturers did not claim Cenvat credit on these charges, the transportation charges should not be considered in the assessable value. Relying on previous decisions and legal precedents, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondents, stating that outward transportation charges beyond the place of removal should not attract duty. As a result, the Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, and the orders were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2019 12:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=563166" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 1784 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279445</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the orders of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in a case concerning the inclusion of transportation charges in the assessable value of excisable goods. It was determined that since the buyers bore the transportation charges and the manufacturers did not claim Cenvat credit on these charges, the transportation charges should not be considered in the assessable value. Relying on previous decisions and legal precedents, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondents, stating that outward transportation charges beyond the place of removal should not attract duty. As a result, the Revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, and the orders were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279445</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>