9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (4) TMI 211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. [Order per : K. Sankararaman, Member (T)]. - The appeal challenges the order passed by Additional Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh demanding Central Excise duty of Rs. 2,000/- from appellant on the ground that appellant had evaded duty on television sets by misdeclaring the cost of their manufacture as Rs. 4,950/-. By so declaring the cost of manufacture of TV sets, appellant to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the price list filed by them which have been approved by the Assistant Collector. When price under Section 4(1)(a) is available, resort to provisions of valuation rules is not called for, and, accordingly, the exercise of costing resorted to by the department is unwarranted. 3. Resisting the arguments of the learned Counsel, Shri K. Srivastava, learned SDR referred to the narration in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r costing of TV sets to decide whether their price was more than Rs. 5,000/- or not. The department had added certain elements like the cost of advertising, sales promotion activity incentives etc. and on that basis the cost of Television set exceeded Rupees five thousand. On merits it was held by the Tribunal that these amounts cannot be included in arriving at the cost. It was the submission by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able value. 5. The above reasoning would clearly apply to the present case though the department in the present case had not accepted the declared cost of the components unlike in the case cited. All the same, there is no case made out that the appellant received a higher price than what had been declared in the price list or shown in the invoices. As has been held by the Tribunal in the oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
