9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (12) TMI 228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er (J)]. The short point to be considered in this case is to what extent it is to included the advertising expenses incurred by the dealers. 2. Shri Sridharan submitted that the appellants are engaged in manufacture of tractors. The appellants marketed the tractors through the network of 250 dealers all over the country. The dealers are independent buyers and not related persons and it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessable value and since the dealers were also benefited by such advertisement for promotion of sales 50% of such expenses cannot to be included as it is nothing held with the product manufactured by the assessee. In other words, the dealers were directly benefited by such advertisement. He referred to the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Hero Honda Motors Ltd. v. Collector of Central Exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed therein. Reliance also has been placed by him in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills v. C.C.E., Pune, reported in 1997 (20) RLT 251 (CEGAT-SB). It was held therein that since transactions between appellants and dealers were on principal to principal basis and some dealers only incurred advertisement expenses that too party cannot be added to the assessable value. Following the ratio of the earlie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the Supreme Court has observed that the cost of the advertisement shared by the assessee and with the dealer and both were benefited, the benefit which is attributed to the dealer and to that extent cannot be included in the assessable value of the assessee. In the instant case, it is clear that both the assessee and dealer were benefited by such advertisement and the share incurred by the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
