https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41125 Packing charges were treated as excludable where they were incurred at the customer's request, so the revision on that point was allowed. By contrast, the petitioners failed to prove the difference in value declared in their price list, and the other revision was rejected on that factual basis. The document reflects that entitlement to the claimed treatment depended on proof of the commercial arrangement and the declared value difference. en-us Mon, 21 Nov 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 May 2010 11:41:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41125 Packing charges were treated as excludable where they were incurred at the customer's request, so the revision on that point was allowed. By contrast, the petitioners failed to prove the difference in value declared in their price list, and the other revision was rejected on that factual basis. The document reflects that entitlement to the claimed treatment depended on proof of the commercial arrangement and the declared value difference. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 21 Nov 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41125