<?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>1986 (7) TMI 108 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41752</link>
    <description>Packing used only for transport and smooth delivery, rather than to make goods fit for ordinary sale, is excluded from assessable value. Established trade discounts are deductible even if described differently, so regional discount and cash discount recognised in the price list were allowed; the alleged lower actual price to a customer required fresh examination to see whether a favoured-customer price had in fact been charged. Refund of excess duty paid under mistake of law was not barred where the writ was filed within the recognised period from discovery of the mistake. Recalculation of assessable value and excess duty was therefore required on remand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Jun 2010 18:06:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80281" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (7) TMI 108 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41752</link>
      <description>Packing used only for transport and smooth delivery, rather than to make goods fit for ordinary sale, is excluded from assessable value. Established trade discounts are deductible even if described differently, so regional discount and cash discount recognised in the price list were allowed; the alleged lower actual price to a customer required fresh examination to see whether a favoured-customer price had in fact been charged. Refund of excess duty paid under mistake of law was not barred where the writ was filed within the recognised period from discovery of the mistake. Recalculation of assessable value and excess duty was therefore required on remand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41752</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>