9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 686X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sides we find that the impugned order stands passed by the Commissioner in remand proceeding when the matter was remanded by the Bench vide its Final Order No. 393/2011-Ex., dated 20-4-2011. It is seen that final order was passed in terms of the Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal in the same appellant's own case reported as 2010 (257) E.L.T. 226 (Tri.-LB). The matter was referred to the Larger Bench in the said case for deciding the issue as to whether the charges towards pre-delivery inspection and after sales service by the dealers from the buyers of the cars are to be included in the assessable value of the cars or not. The Larger Bench answered the referred issue against the appellant and sent the matter back to the referral Bench fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uded in the assessable value, unconditional stay was granted. He submits that Bench while granting stay, took note of the Larger Bench decision in appellant's own case but did not agree with the same. Ld. Advocate also draws our attention to subsequent decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Tata Motors Ltd. v. UOI - 2012 (286) E.L.T. 161 (Bom.) wherein after taking note of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in appellant's own case, the High Court did not agree with the same and also quashed the Board's Circular No. 634/34/2002-CX., dated 1-7-2002. The Hon'ble High Court observed that pre-delivery inspection and free after sales services are incurred by the dealer as part of their responsibility under dealership agreement and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petition amounts to as if a declaration of the law by the Larger Bench still holds the field, inasmuch as the appellant's request for staying operation of the same has not been accepted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. If that be so, the Larger Bench decision read with subsequent order of remand is operative and the Commissioner was bound to follow the same. Accordingly, he has quantified the duty demand in terms of remand order. The stay order referred and relied upon decision by the ld. Advocate in their own case deals with an independent appeal and has arrived at independent decision. Inasmuch as the present matter stems out of the earlier proceeding which have not been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court we find no reason to grant dispens ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
