9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 529X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e them and sell as soft drinks. The dispute is about the excise valuation of NABB. During the relevant period, the appellants were charging, in addition to the price of NABB, amounts towards advertisement from the buyers of NABB. These advertisement charges were for promotion of beverages. The excise authorities took the view that such collection of additional amounts was only a device and actually the amount represented part of the value of NABB. For this reason, it was alleged that the amount realised towards advertisement costs of bevarages should also form part of assessable value of NABB. 3. When the matter came up for adjudication, the appellants contended that the advertisement of beverages have nothing to do with the price of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned counsel has taken us through the judgment in detail and has shown that the dispute in the later case was also whether the advertisement costs for beverages could form part of the assessable value of NABB and the Apex Court held that it is not to be. The Court observed as under : The Tribunal reversed the findings of the departmental authorities on appeal. The Tribunal found, as a fact, that there was a distinction between the advertisement costs incurred by the respondent and the advertisement costs incurred by SAMs. It followed the earlier decision of the Tribunal in Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise reported in 1996 (82) E.L.T. 33 which held that the advertisement costs of the aerated water promoted the marketabil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Foods Ltd. [1997 (91) E.L.T. 544 (S.C.)]. 6. As against the above submission of the learned Senior counsel for the appellants, the learned SDR has pointed out that in the present case since the advertisement cost was recovered by the manufacturer of NABB itself, the decision of the Apex Court is not applicable to the present case. 7. A perusal of the record of the case and the judgment of the Apex Court makes it clear that the rule contained in the judgment is that the cost incurred towards marketing of beverages cannot find a place in the assessment of the beverage base. Thus the issue remains settled in favour of the appellants. Accordingly, the present appeals are allowed after setting aside the impugned order. The appellants shall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
