9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 908X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... collected from the buyers and further that the amount of transportation charges paid by the appellant were disclosed in its books of account under the head of expenditure. Neither the primary nor the appellate Authority adverted to any evidence whatsoever, documentary or oral, on the basis of which the primary authority perversely in para 17; and the appellate Authority in the impugned order affirmed, that the appellant was required to include the value of transportation charges in addition to the transaction value, on which duty was paid. Neither the primary nor the appellate orders adverted to any evidence on record to justify this perverse conclusion (based on no evidence), concurrently recorded. - Decided in favour of assessee. - E/601 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... destination basis; that the ownership as well as risk of damage/loss of goods remained with the appellant till the destination delivery of the batteries; that the appellant had paid ₹ 9,48,837/- towards outward freight in respect of these institutional sales but failed to include this amount in the value of the batteries, as per the provisions of the explanation to Rule 5 of the Valuation Rules, 2000, since the MRP provisions do not apply in respect of institutional sales; and (c) That the appellant in its response to a departmental letter had submitted, inter alia that the value of outward freight of ₹ 9,48,837/- was included in the assessable value since these are institutional sales value; that the assessee and buyers ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... collected by the party in relation to the sale of excisable goods whether as a part of the price or over and above the price is included in the assessable value. 7. The paragraph of the order-in-original (extracted above) clearly illustrates the irrelevance and perversity in the reasoning process recorded by the ld. Primary authority. The paragraph comprises two sentences. The first sentence concludes that the evidence on record establishes that the party had collected more than the amount included in the assessable value of the goods manufactured by the appellant. The second sentence records that there is no evidence on record to show that the entire amount collected by the party in relation to the sale of the excisable goods, whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in relation to the batteries/cells sold by the appellants to the three companies. According to the ld. Appellate Commissioner neither the purchase orders, the invoices nor the certificate of the Chartered Accountant substantiate the appellant s contention of not having separately collected freight charges from the buyers of the goods. Consequently, the appellate Authority found no warrant for interference and dismissed the appeal. Hence the assessee is before us. 9. On the admitted factual scenario, the appellant sold the excisable goods on FOR destination basis to the three institutions and remitted excise duty on the transaction value. The primary Authority recorded the fact and a conclusion that the risk and responsibility for the g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion charges by the appellant, over and above the transaction value indicated in the invoices which was the basis for remittance of excise duty. 11. The conclusion recorded by the primary Authority in para 17 of the order-in-original is thus a perverse and ipse dixit conclusion based on no evidence, oral or documentary. 12. The ld. Appellate authority adopts the same fallacious premise, that the burden is upon the appellant to establish that it had not collected transportation charges (in addition to the transaction value) from buyers of its goods. 13. Ld. AR for the Revenue in desperation pleads that at best the impugned order be set aside and the matter remitted to the primary Authority for de novo adjudication. Reliance for this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to facilitate a finding as to additional collection of outward freight by the appellant. The appellant clearly, specifically and categorically pleaded in response to the Show Cause Notice that since the sales were on FOR destination basis, the transaction value includes the value of freight and that the freight charges were not separately collected from the buyers and further that the amount of transportation charges paid by the appellant were disclosed in its books of account under the head of expenditure. Neither the primary nor the appellate Authority adverted to any evidence whatsoever, documentary or oral, on the basis of which the primary authority perversely in para 17; and the appellate Authority in the impugned order affirmed, that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
