<?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>1989 (4) TMI 94 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42636</link>
    <description>Transmission belting made in the petitioner&#039;s own factory with its own labour, machinery and raw materials, even if supplied exclusively to Goodyear under its brand, was treated as manufactured by the petitioner for central excise purposes. The assessable value had to be based on the wholesale price charged by the actual manufacturer to Goodyear, not on Goodyear&#039;s later resale price to dealers and customers. On refund, duty collected without authority of law is ordinarily refundable, but the Court did not grant immediate relief on the record; it left the petitioner to pursue a proper refund application before the statutory authority for consideration by a speaking order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Jun 2010 13:37:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81165" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (4) TMI 94 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42636</link>
      <description>Transmission belting made in the petitioner&#039;s own factory with its own labour, machinery and raw materials, even if supplied exclusively to Goodyear under its brand, was treated as manufactured by the petitioner for central excise purposes. The assessable value had to be based on the wholesale price charged by the actual manufacturer to Goodyear, not on Goodyear&#039;s later resale price to dealers and customers. On refund, duty collected without authority of law is ordinarily refundable, but the Court did not grant immediate relief on the record; it left the petitioner to pursue a proper refund application before the statutory authority for consideration by a speaking order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42636</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>