9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 854X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Sanjay Jain, AR, for the Respondent. ORDER Both the appeals, one filed by the assessee and the other by the Revenue are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of same impugned order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he has allowed the assessee' claim of deduction of equalized freight but has rejected their claim of third party inspecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reme Court in its judgment reported at 2002 (146) E.L.T. 31 (S.C.) and again the same position of law was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in it's judgment in the case of M/s. Prabhat Zarda Factory - 2002 (146) E.L.T. 497 (S.C.), the C.B.E. & C. in consultation with Additional Solicitor General, accepted the above position of law as enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court." Revenue is in app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or DCS&D. Such charges collected by the appellant from M/s. U.P. Jal Nigam are paid to RITES or DCS&D. Commissioner (Appeals) has held that such inspection is necessary for marketability of the goods and as such, value has to be included in the assessable value. Accordingly, he has confirmed the demand and imposed penalties. 5. We find that such inspection is being carried out only in respe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
