1997 (12) TMI 181

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Member (T)]. This appeal has been preferred by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai against the impugned order captioned above passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai. 2. The respondents manufacture pneumatic control system falling under Chapter sub-heading 8481.80 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The jurisdictional Asstt. Commissioner initiated proceedings .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... few valves sold fitted the pressure gauge and also the catalogue of product the respondents showed that the pressure gauge as an accessory and optional and also so specified in the classification list, the Commissioner (Appeals) held that in these circumstances as optional accessory the value of the pressure gauge which is a bought out item cannot be included in the assessable value of the pneumat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... relied upon the Tribunal decision in the case of Eureka Forbes Limited v. Collector of Central Excise, Meerut - 1996 (83) E.L.T. 334 (Tribunal), wherein the Tribunal has held that optional accessories when they are not supplied or fitted with the equipment and cleared from the factory of manufacture, the cost of such optional accessories are not be included in the assessable value. In coming to t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X