9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 760X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CEA, 1944. The CBEC has issued a Circular dated 12-5-00 in which in Para 2.2 it has been clarified that the concept of new transaction value under Section 4 has same scope as that of old Section 4 of the Act and Valuation Rules. - third party s inspection charges initially paid by the appellants and subsequently reimbursed by the buyers is not includible in the assessable value of the goods. I, therefore, hold that duty demand of Rs. 25,125/- on inspection charges along with interest is not sustainable - Following decision of M/s. Choksi Tube Co. Ltd. v. CCE Ahmedabad [2002 (11) TMI 521 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI], M/s. Sunrise Structurals & Engg. P. Ltd. v. CCE, Nagpur [2002 (6) TMI 136 - CEGAT, MUMBAI], M/s. Southern Structurals Ltd. v. CCE, Che ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the transaction value under the new Section 4 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. A cross objection E/MA/CO/679/07 has been filed by the respondent M/s. Luby Submersibles Ltd. emphasizing that their products are being used by individuals, agriculturists, industrialists or the government and in all these cases goods are completely tested and ready for use as per the prescribed norms. It is their ground that nobody even asks for a trial run but some of the government buyers in certain cases impose a condition that goods should again be tested from an approved laboratory before lifting the goods from respondents factory. Such testing done for the second time on the basis of the option exercised by the buyer is not required to be added to the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ery bench in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad-II Vs. Johnson Pumps (I) Ltd. (Supra) has held as follows in paragraph 4 and 5: 4. Apart from the various decisions discussed by the Commissioner (Appeals), we also note that he has taken note of the Boards Circular which is in favour of the assessee. For better appreciation, we reproduce the relevant paragraph of his order as under: I further find that under erstwhile Section 4, which existing prior to 1-7-2000. (i) The Hon ble Supreme Court of India in case of Collector. of C.E., Jaipur v. M/s. CIMMCO Ltd. - 1996 (84) E.L.T. 167 (S.C.) has upheld the Tribunal Order Nos. 296-301/94-A, dated 19-10-94 reported in 1994 (74) E.L.T. 687 (Tribunal), holding that inspection charges i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circular dated 16-2-88 issued under erstwhile Section 4 of the Act in respect of Pre-delivery Inspection charges has not stood the test of legal scrutiny as Tribunal s judgment has been otherwise and consequently CBEC withdrew its subsequent circular No. 355/77/97-CX, dated 19-11-97 and 435/I/99-CX dated 12-1-99 vide Circular No. 681/72/2002-CX, dated 12-12-02 in the context of old Section 4 of CEA, 1944. The CBEC has issued a Circular dated 12-5-00 [2000 (118) E.L.T. 45] in which in Para 2.2 it has been clarified that the concept of new transaction value under Section 4 has same scope as that of old Section 4 of the Act and Valuation Rules. Hence, respectfully following the ratio of the above decisions, I hold that the third partys ins ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
