1997 (12) TMI 444

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nkataramani, Member (T)]. The appellants manufacture machinery falling under Chapter 84 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The department found that the appellants were charging commissioning and erection charges for the machines installed by them at their customer s premises through issue of separate bills/invoices. It was further found that the appellants did not include these charges in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Hence he confirmed the demand. 2. Shri S.C. Bhide, the ld. Counsel for the appellants submitted that erection and commissioning charges were incurred after the removal of the machines on payment of duty from the factory. This charge is not compulsory but optional. He cited the decision of the 36th Meeting of the Central Advisory Council held on 10-1-1997, wherein on a question of includibility .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ncludible in the assessable value, especially, in a case where these charges were optional. 3. Shri S.V. Singh, the ld. D.R. contended that there are no details available to indicate that the machinery at erection site becomes immovable property. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions. The appellants have claimed before the adjudicating authority that the machinery after fully manufac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X