9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 468X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n these 3 appeals directed against Order-in-Appeal No. SRK/34/M.III/2007 dated 19.7.2007, No. SRK/416/M-III/2007 dated 31.10.2007 and No. YDB/130/M-II/2009 dated 29.10.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai-II, a common issue is involved, therefore, they are being taken up together for consideration and disposal. 2. The appellant M/s Hercules Hoists Ltd. is manufactur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ingly, show-cause notices were issued and demands confirmed along with interest and penalties. Aggrieved of the same, the appellant is before us. 3. None represented the appellant and there is a request for adjournment. 4. We have perused the appeal memorandum, wherein it is stated that they are undertaking erection, commission and installation activities only at the request of the customers in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... supplied. 6. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides. 6.1 We also notice that this issue had come up several times before this Tribunal and this Tribunal has consistently held that erection, commissioning and installation activity undertaken and amount charged separately, cannot form part of the assessable value of the goods supplied. Some of these decisions are De Nora ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and installation charges in the assessable value of the lift/elevators cannot be sustained in law as manufacture and rendering of services are distinct and different activities and have been taken under separate contracts. 7. In view of the above, the impugned demands are not sustainable in law and accordingly, we set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals with consequential relief, if a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
