<?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>1991 (4) TMI 139 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43110</link>
    <description>For valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excises &amp; Salt Act, 1944, excise duty is computed on the normal wholesale price charged by the manufacturer when the buyer is not a related person and price is the sole consideration. On the admitted facts, the manufacturer sold dry cell batteries to M/s. Peico Limited at a stipulated price, so the buyer&#039;s later resale price to its own dealers did not affect assessable value. The writ challenge was also treated as maintainable because the facts were largely admitted, the issue was one of law, and alternative remedies were not considered a bar in the circumstances. The impugned order was quashed and duty was directed to be assessed on the manufacturer&#039;s sale price.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 11:45:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81639" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (4) TMI 139 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43110</link>
      <description>For valuation under Section 4 of the Central Excises &amp; Salt Act, 1944, excise duty is computed on the normal wholesale price charged by the manufacturer when the buyer is not a related person and price is the sole consideration. On the admitted facts, the manufacturer sold dry cell batteries to M/s. Peico Limited at a stipulated price, so the buyer&#039;s later resale price to its own dealers did not affect assessable value. The writ challenge was also treated as maintainable because the facts were largely admitted, the issue was one of law, and alternative remedies were not considered a bar in the circumstances. The impugned order was quashed and duty was directed to be assessed on the manufacturer&#039;s sale price.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43110</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>