<?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>2000 (6) TMI 63 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49827</link>
    <description>Machinery permanently embedded to the earth, including furnace, kettle, chimney and processing unit, was treated as immovable and not marketable, so it did not qualify as excisable goods. On that basis, its value could not be added for computing the clearance turnover or exemption limit under the relevant notifications. The kettle, chimney and processing unit were also regarded as parts of the plant rather than separate complete machinery, and exempt clearances under another notification were excluded from the computation. Transportation charges for bringing goods to the factory and electrical installation charges were also excluded, as they were not shown to form part of the relevant value or to fall within the show cause notice basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:50:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88307" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (6) TMI 63 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49827</link>
      <description>Machinery permanently embedded to the earth, including furnace, kettle, chimney and processing unit, was treated as immovable and not marketable, so it did not qualify as excisable goods. On that basis, its value could not be added for computing the clearance turnover or exemption limit under the relevant notifications. The kettle, chimney and processing unit were also regarded as parts of the plant rather than separate complete machinery, and exempt clearances under another notification were excluded from the computation. Transportation charges for bringing goods to the factory and electrical installation charges were also excluded, as they were not shown to form part of the relevant value or to fall within the show cause notice basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49827</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>