<?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>2004 (1) TMI 138 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52659</link>
    <description>The appellant&#039;s appeal was partly allowed in a case involving the deduction of transportation charges from the assessable value of goods sold for domestic clearance. The Tribunal upheld its decision against the appellant based on a previous ruling until the Supreme Court intervenes. However, the appellant succeeded in claiming expenses for the return journey of specialized vehicles transporting two-wheelers, as these vehicles are uniquely designed and cannot carry other goods. Additionally, the inclusion of excess freight collected in the assessable value of goods manufactured was decided in favor of the appellant, citing a Supreme Court precedent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 10:39:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91136" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (1) TMI 138 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52659</link>
      <description>The appellant&#039;s appeal was partly allowed in a case involving the deduction of transportation charges from the assessable value of goods sold for domestic clearance. The Tribunal upheld its decision against the appellant based on a previous ruling until the Supreme Court intervenes. However, the appellant succeeded in claiming expenses for the return journey of specialized vehicles transporting two-wheelers, as these vehicles are uniquely designed and cannot carry other goods. Additionally, the inclusion of excess freight collected in the assessable value of goods manufactured was decided in favor of the appellant, citing a Supreme Court precedent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52659</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>