9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 574X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ates, for the Appellant. Shri T.H. Rao, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President]. - The appellants herein are the manufacturers of excisable goods falling under Chapters 26, 40, 72, 76, 84 and 87 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1995 and are clearing the same on payment of duty to their OE customers directly from the factory gate. In addition to that, they also cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion order, this appeal has been filed before the Tribunal. 2. We have heard both sides. 3. The contention of the assessees that depot can be treated as a place of removal and in cases of inter-depot transfers subsequent sale price at the later depot would not affect the assessable value when the goods are transferred to the first depot from the factory is not tenable in the light of Rule 7 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h goods has to be determined on the basis of the value at which they are sold, which in this case is from the depot in Pune. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order including 4% of Ware housing charges in the assessable value. However, we are of the view that this is not a case where any penalty is called for and set aside the same. In the result, the appeal is partially allowed by upholding the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
