1999 (6) TMI 296 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:

1. Valuation of bilingual electronic typewriters.
2. Inclusion of the value of the second language daisy wheel in the assessable value.
3. Classification of the second language daisy wheel as an accessory or an essential part.
4. Modvat credit eligibility for the second language daisy wheel.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Valuation of Bilingual Electronic Typewriters:

M/s. Network Ltd. manufactured bilingual electronic typewriters requiring two daisy wheels for each language. The primary issue was whether the value of the second language daisy wheel should be included in the assessable value of the bilingual typewriters. The appellants did not include the value of the non-English daisy wheel in the assessable value, arguing it was an accessory, not an essential part. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Noida, and the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Ghaziabad, held that the value of the second daisy wheel was includible in the assessable value, as the typewriter could not function as bilingual without it.

2. Inclusion of the Value of the Second Language Daisy Wheel:

The Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Noida, determined that the bilingual typewriter's functionality depended on having daisy wheels for both languages. The Tribunal's decision in Auto Control Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise was cited, which established that the value of essential components must be included in the assessable value. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) confirmed this view, noting that the higher price of bilingual typewriters compared to single-language ones indicated the necessity of both daisy wheels.

3. Classification of the Second Language Daisy Wheel:

The appellants argued that the second language daisy wheel was an accessory, not an essential part. However, the Tribunal found that both daisy wheels were indispensable for the bilingual typewriter's function. The definition of "accessory" from Murray's Oxford English Dictionary and Webster's 3rd New International Dictionary was considered, concluding that an accessory is something of secondary importance, which did not apply to the second language daisy wheel. The Tribunal referenced several decisions, including those in Diamond Clock Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CCE and P.S.I. Data Systems Ltd. v. CCE, to support that the second language daisy wheel was an essential part, not an accessory.

4. Modvat Credit Eligibility:

The appellants contended for Modvat credit if the value of the second language daisy wheel was included in the assessable value. However, since the second language daisy wheel was not brought into the factory premises, this plea was not raised earlier. The Tribunal allowed the appellants to raise this plea before the proper officers, who would examine it on merits under relevant law provisions. The Tribunal clarified that Modvat credit should not be denied solely because the required declaration was not filed before supplying the second language daisy wheels.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal agreed with the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) that the value of both daisy wheels was includible in the assessable value of bilingual typewriters. The appeals were rejected, and the Tribunal provided the appellants an opportunity to pursue Modvat credit claims before appropriate authorities.