https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41893 Where car sales were invoiced at a controlled price but expressly treated as provisional, with the purchaser accepting liability for any later increase, the subsequently crystallised higher amount formed part of the wholesale cash price for valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act. On that basis, the assessable value was correctly taken at the higher price. The demand for additional excise duty was also not confined by Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, because the short levy did not arise from the limited errors contemplated by that rule; recovery was therefore validly made under the residuary Rule 10-A. The challenge to the duty demand accordingly failed. en-us Thu, 19 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jun 2010 17:33:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41893 Where car sales were invoiced at a controlled price but expressly treated as provisional, with the purchaser accepting liability for any later increase, the subsequently crystallised higher amount formed part of the wholesale cash price for valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act. On that basis, the assessable value was correctly taken at the higher price. The demand for additional excise duty was also not confined by Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, because the short levy did not arise from the limited errors contemplated by that rule; recovery was therefore validly made under the residuary Rule 10-A. The challenge to the duty demand accordingly failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 19 Mar 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41893