9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (5) TMI 143X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 29A of the erstwhile Tariff and clearing the same on payment of duty on the basis of the approved price lists . During the period in question 7 units were supplied to private purchasers and 23 to Public Sector Undertakings on contracts. The factory of the appellant was visited by Preventive Staff in December 1985 and January 1986. It was found that the package air conditioners cleared from the factory were complete and fully manufactured, relevant invoices and packing lists referred only to the package air conditioners and not to any accessories, that accessories were purported to have been sold to the same customers under separate Bills, the sale of accessories was not disclosed to the department and the contracts did not indicate the name ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot be regarded as part of the price of the air conditioners and it was for the department to adduce evidence to show which part of the value represented part of the consideration for the air conditioners. These contentions were rebutted on behalf of the department. 4. The show cause notice proceeded on the basis that in fact no accessory was supplied by the appellant. It was clarified during the enquiry that the accessories were bought out items. Though the appellant was required to produce the documents relating to bought out items, no such documents were produced. These facts were referred to in the show cause notice and there was no denial of these averments in the reply to the show cause notice. If as a matter of fact these accessorie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 17,000/- and Rs. 27,200/- respectively and Rs. 23,500/- and Rs. 34,000/- respectively. These figures themselves support the case set out in the show cause notice that a substantial part of the price of the air conditioners was shifted to accessories. We have already referred to the failure of the appellant to produce documents relating to bought out items from which the necessary inference would be that there were no such bought out items. In these circumstances, the conclusion arrived at by the Additional Collector that the entire price shown for the alleged accessories was really a part of the price of the air conditioner, has to be sustained. 6. The confirmation of the demand of duty calls for no interference. The Additional Collec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
