<?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>2005 (2) TMI 358 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54084</link>
    <description>Valuation of steel pipes under excise law requires inclusion of process-related costs in the assessable value where those costs form part of manufacture or preparation of the goods. Applying the principle accepted in Sidhartha Tubes, guniting, transportation and handling charges were treated as includible because the pipes were not duty-paid clearances to another unit for further processing not amounting to manufacture. The Board circular relied on by the assessee was read narrowly and held inapplicable on those facts, so it did not exclude the inclusion of such charges. The earlier Supreme Court valuation principle therefore continued to govern the assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 09:44:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92561" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 358 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54084</link>
      <description>Valuation of steel pipes under excise law requires inclusion of process-related costs in the assessable value where those costs form part of manufacture or preparation of the goods. Applying the principle accepted in Sidhartha Tubes, guniting, transportation and handling charges were treated as includible because the pipes were not duty-paid clearances to another unit for further processing not amounting to manufacture. The Board circular relied on by the assessee was read narrowly and held inapplicable on those facts, so it did not exclude the inclusion of such charges. The earlier Supreme Court valuation principle therefore continued to govern the assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54084</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>