2013 (12) TMI 872

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... al of the equipment – sometimes, the order was placed for supply of the equipment without asking for any trial – Thus, the trial of equipment is not condition precedent to the sale – Decided against Assessee. - E/2865/2004-Mum - - - Dated:- 31-7-2013 - S S Kang And P K Jain, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri V R Kelkar, Consultant For the Respondent : Shri Ahibharan, Addl. Commissioner (AR) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Appeals) dismissed the appeal. 4. The contention of appellant is that the trial of the equipment is not condition precedent to sale of goods. In certain cases, the customers asked for trial of the equipment and appellants are charging certain amounts. In same case even after the trial, some of the customers do not place orders for purchase of the equipment. In certain cases the orders were place .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s placed for supply of the equipment without asking for any trial. In these circumstances, the trial of equipment is not condition precedent to the sale. Further, we find that it is not a case of Revenue that appellants are suppressing the assessable value of equipment under the guise of trial charges. In these circumstances, we find no merit in the contention of the appellant, the impugned order .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X