2014 (4) TMI 330 - AT - Central Excise

Valuation of goods - Inclusion of pre-delivery inspection charges as also after sale charges in the assessable value of the cars sold by the appellant - Held that - Following the decision of assessee s own previous case 2013 (1) TMI 329 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI - Stay granted.

Summary

Issues:
1. Inclusion of pre-delivery inspection charges and after-sale charges in the assessable value of cars sold by the appellant.
2. Impact of Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal and subsequent stay petitions on the case.
3. Relevance of Bombay High Court decision in Tata Motors Ltd. Vs. Union of India on the issue.

Issue 1: Inclusion of charges in assessable value
The judgment confirms demand against the appellant for including pre-delivery inspection charges and after-sale charges in the assessable value of cars sold. The advocate acknowledges the adverse decision by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in their case and mentions that an appeal is pending in the Supreme Court without any stay.

Issue 2: Impact of Tribunal decisions and stay petitions
The advocate highlights that a subsequent stay petition considered the Larger Bench decision and observed that it did not account for the Supreme Court decision in the case of Philips India Ltd., leading to an unconditional stay granted to the appellant. This decision was crucial in dispensing with the pre-deposit condition for the appellant's case.

Issue 3: Relevance of Bombay High Court decision
The judgment references the Bombay High Court decision in Tata Motors Ltd. Vs. Union of India, which invalidated a circular by the Board and established that pre-delivery inspection and after-sale service charges should not be part of the assessable value. The Revenue has challenged this decision in the Supreme Court, but there is no stay in operation.

Conclusion
Considering the Tribunal's previous stay granted to the appellant, the Bombay High Court decision, and the pending Supreme Court appeals, the judgment allows the stay petition without requiring a pre-deposit of dues. It also directs the Registry to consolidate the present appeal with an earlier appeal by the same appellant pending a decision from the Supreme Court.