9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 153X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount of transportation charges from the customers through debit notes - It can also be seen from the grounds of appeal reproduced herein above, the Revenue has not controverted this factual finding by any contrary evidence - Appeal is rejected X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, South Daman, Daman Commissionerate, on the grounds that in the instant case the assessee cleared the goods from the factory gate, the place of removal was the factory gate, not at the customer s site and hence they were not required to include the amount of freight charges so recovered through debit notes from their customers, in the assessable value. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the period from 01.07.2000 to 05.06.2002. The Commissioner (Appeal) did not examine this aspect while setting aside the OIO. Hence the OIA may be set aside and the case may be remanded back to the original adjudicating authority for determining the point of sale in each case of removal of the excisable goods during the period. 4. After hearing submissions made by both the sides, we find that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l cost charges from the buyers should be shown. As far as the subject goods are concerned, the place of removal and point of sale is factory gate and the valuation has to be done in terms of Rule 5 of Valuation Rules. The appellants had satisfied the conditions of Rule 5, therefore, the lower authority s impugned order in original deserves to be set-aside, being non sustainable. As is seen from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
