9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... advertisement promoted the sale of the dealers also and therefore his expenses cannot be included in the expenses of the manufacturer - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... along with a penalty of ₹ 1,50,000/- and ₹ 1,64,86,077/- against M/s Raymond Ltd. along with penalty of equivalent amount and another penalty of ₹ 10 lakhs was imposed on Shri Vasant Naag, General Manager, Indirect taxation, of M/s Raymond. 3. Learned Advocate for the appellants submits that the demand has been confirmed only for the period from 01.07.2000 when new Section 4 was introduced as it was considered that the scope of the new Section 4 is much wider than the earlier Section 4 and therefore all the amount recovered from the customer would form part of the assessable value of the goods sold. Reference was invited to new Section 4(1) which reads as under :- "a. in a case where the goods are sold by the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of sale. It was contended that this matter came up for consideration in the case of Philips India Ltd., wherein also advertisement and free after sales service during the guarantee period was provided by dealers to the product of Philips under an agreement and manufacturer and dealers were sharing advertisement expenses on 50% each basis and it was held that the advertisements benefit both and was for the mutual benefit of the manufacturer and the dealer and therefore adjustment of advertisement expenses cannot be added to the assessable value. It was submitted that though the decision was in respect of the old Section 4, the same was still applicable as the expenses shared by the dealers was for his own profit and therefore cannot be adde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r to 01.04.20071 is not relevant in the present case. 7. We have considered the submission. We find that this issue has been decided by the Tribunal in the case of Maruti Udyog and Mahindra and Mahindra (cited supra) wherein it has been held that advertisement cost and pre-delivery inspection and after sales service charges which are sharable between the manufacturer and the dealer cannot be included in the assessable value even after 01.04.20071 as the advertisement promoted the sale of the dealers also and therefore his expenses cannot be included in the expenses of the manufacturer. Following these two decisions we set aside the orders of the Commissioner(Appeals) in the case of Kinetic Engineering and Commissioner's order in the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
