<?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 (3) TMI 165 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52789</link>
    <description>Imported software supplied separately to telecom service providers could not be added to the assessable value of telephone exchange equipment manufactured in India for central excise purposes. Excise duty applies only to goods manufactured in the factory, and the liability ends on clearance of the manufactured goods; the software was a distinct post-manufacture transaction, not part of the goods assembled or cleared from the factory. Chapter 85 treated software and recorded media separately, and Note 6 did not permit its inclusion in the value of telecom equipment. The separate classification of hardware and software therefore required exclusion of the software value, rendering the duty demand, interest, and penalty unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 17:54:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91266" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 165 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52789</link>
      <description>Imported software supplied separately to telecom service providers could not be added to the assessable value of telephone exchange equipment manufactured in India for central excise purposes. Excise duty applies only to goods manufactured in the factory, and the liability ends on clearance of the manufactured goods; the software was a distinct post-manufacture transaction, not part of the goods assembled or cleared from the factory. Chapter 85 treated software and recorded media separately, and Note 6 did not permit its inclusion in the value of telecom equipment. The separate classification of hardware and software therefore required exclusion of the software value, rendering the duty demand, interest, and penalty unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52789</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>