Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2010 (11) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2010 (11) TMI 161 - AT - Central Excise


Issues:
Clubbing of clearances of two units for small scale exemption benefits.
Inclusion of bought out items in the assessable value of dental chairs.

Clubbing of Clearances:
The case involved M/s. Suzy Nova Dental Pvt. Limited and M/s. S. Nova Dental Corporation engaged in manufacturing dental chairs. The Revenue contended that the clearances of both units should be clubbed for exemption benefits. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) disagreed, noting the units' separate legal identities, financial transactions, and orders secured individually. The Revenue failed to contest these findings adequately. The Tribunal emphasized the need for evidence in each case to justify clubbing clearances. Noting the lack of rebuttal by the Revenue, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision.

Inclusion of Bought Out Items:
Regarding the inclusion of bought out items in assessable value, the appellants imported spares and components, supplying them directly to buyers from a separate godown without processing at the factory. The Tribunal highlighted that optional items supplied separately need not be included in the assessable value, citing precedents. The Tribunal agreed that the goods supplied, like digital pulp testers and handpieces, were not integral to the dental chairs and were not processed with the chairs. Relying on relevant case law, the Tribunal upheld the decision to set aside the demand for duty and penalties. The appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found no errors in the Commissioner's decision to set aside the duty demand and penalties on the respondents. The judgment highlighted the importance of separate legal entities and the lack of evidence supporting the Revenue's claims. The inclusion of bought out items in the assessable value was deemed unnecessary based on precedents and the nature of the supplied goods. The appeals by the Revenue were unsuccessful, and the initial decision was upheld.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates