9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (1) TMI 668 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - manufacture of DG set - inclusion of pre-delivery inspection charges and after sale service charges in the assessable value - HELD THAT - The appellant have discharged the excise duty on sale price of DG set. The activity of testing of DG set at the site of the customer and the use of diesel is not part and partial of sale of DG set. It is an independent activity of service therefore the cost of diesel which was recovered by the appellant from the customer as reimbursement for the testing of the DG set is not includable in the transaction value towards the sale of DG set. The activity of filling of Diesel in the DG Set at the site Company is at most can be considered as pre-delivery inspection charges. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MYSORE VERSUS M/S TVS MOTORS COMPANY LTD. 2015 (12) TMI 874 - SUPREME COURT held that the charges for pre- delivery inspection is not includable in the Assessable Value. The demand of duty on the cost of diesel is not sustainable - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Whether pre-delivery inspection charges and after-sale service charges are includable in the transaction value. Analysis: The case involved a dispute regarding the inclusion of charges for filling diesel during installation and commissioning of DG sets in the transaction value for excise duty calculation. The department contended that these charges were part of pre-delivery inspection charges and should be included in the transaction value. The appellant argued that such charges were related to service activities and not part of the sale of DG sets, citing relevant case law. The appellant relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Mysore Vs. TVS Motors Co. Ltd., which clarified that charges for pre-delivery inspection are not includable in the assessable value. Additionally, the appellant highlighted other judgments supporting their position, such as Veena Industries Ltd. Vs. CCE & ST, Vapi and Laxmi Udyog Oil Field Equipment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jaipur-II. The Assistant Commissioner representing the revenue reiterated the findings of the impugned order and referred to a Larger Bench judgment of the tribunal in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III. However, the appellate tribunal examined the submissions from both sides and reviewed the records. The tribunal observed that the activity of testing DG sets and using diesel at the customer's site was a separate service activity, not integral to the sale of DG sets. Therefore, the cost of diesel recovered by the appellant for testing purposes should not be included in the transaction value for excise duty calculation. The tribunal emphasized that the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in TVS Motors Co. Ltd. case held that charges for pre-delivery inspection should not be included in the assessable value. The tribunal also noted that the appellant had paid service tax on the installation and commissioning activities, further supporting the distinction between the service activities and the sale of DG sets. Consequently, the tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demand for duty on the cost of diesel and allowing the appeal. In conclusion, the tribunal's decision clarified the treatment of charges related to service activities, emphasizing the distinction between service charges and transaction value for excise duty purposes. The judgment provided a detailed analysis of relevant case law and statutory provisions to support the decision in favor of the appellant.
|
