1998 (7) TMI 214 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Inclusion of the value of brought out items in the assessable value of goods manufactured.
2. Classification of goods put in sets under Rule 3(b) of Interpretation of Tariff Schedule.

Issue 1: Inclusion of the value of brought out items
The appeal questioned whether the value of brought out items should be included in the assessable value of goods manufactured by the appellants. The assessee argued that the items they manufactured were independent parts not functionally dependent on the brought out items. The Commissioner noted that the brought out items were supplied as replacements and not required to be assembled with the manufactured goods. It was established that the assessee was not involved in any manufacturing process regarding the brought out items, indicating a trading activity. Consequently, the Commissioner ruled that there was no basis for loading the assessable value with the value of brought out items, leading to the Revenue's appeal against this decision.

Issue 2: Classification of goods put in sets
The contention under Rule 3(b) of the Interpretation of Tariff Schedule revolved around classifying goods put in sets. The Revenue argued that as the goods were sold as kits at a fixed price, they should be classified under Heading 87.08 as parts of motor vehicles. Citing a previous judgment regarding the manufacture of new products from individual items, the Revenue sought to add the value of brought out items. However, the Advocate distinguished the case, emphasizing that in the present scenario, the items were independently supplied as kits for customer convenience. Referring to another judgment, it was highlighted that the combination of items did not result in a new commercial product. The Tribunal, after considering the arguments and factual findings, concluded that no new commodity emerged from combining the brought out items with the manufactured products. The judgment in favor of the assessee was based on the factual independence of the items and the absence of a new product, contrasting it with the case where a new product emerged from combining individual items.

In conclusion, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, affirming that the brought out items being supplied as kits did not create a new product, aligning with the factual findings and previous judgments.