9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aining has no nexus with the activity of manufacturing, sale or marketing of the product and the same does not enrich the product has force. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of PSI Data Systems Ltd. (1996 (12) TMI 47 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) held that the charges for installation of computers and training of customer's personnel to operate and maintain it was not includable in the assessable value of the computers. Similarly, in the case of Kirloskar Electric Co Ltd. [2004 (8) TMI 293 - CESTAT, BANGALORE], National Radio & Electronics Co. Ltd. [1998 (2) TMI 297 - CEGAT, MUMBAI], Minicomp Ltd. (2002 (6) TMI 146 - CEGAT, MUMBAI), it has been held that the amounts collected for training are not includable in the assessable value - charges o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to be added in the assessable value and the duty should be paid accordingly. On the other hand, the stand of the appellant was that the appellant had bonafide belief that charges recovered on account of training the customer's staff are not includable in the assessable value. In spite of that they calculated and paid the amount of ₹ 1,78,320/- on 22/07/2002 through TR-6 challan under protest by debiting the duty in PLA without waiting for any written communication from the department. Thereafter, the appellant filed a refund claim on the basis of instructions issued by the CBEC vide Circular No. 354/81/2000-TRU dated 30/06/2000 which seeks to clarify that the amount charged for training customer's staff is not includable in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s: a) PSI Data Systems Ltd., Vs. CCE-1997 (89) ELT 3 (SC) b) Thermax Ltd., vs. CCE - 1998 (99) ELT 481 (SC) c) Brahmos Aerospace Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Hyderabad - 2014 (307) ELT 795 (Tri-Bang) d) Rockwell Automation India Pvt. Ltd., vs. CCE - Ghaziabad - 2008 (228)ELT 127 (Tri-Del) e) Minicomp Ltd., Vs. CCE Aurangabad - 2003 (157) ELT 34 (Tri-Mumbai) f) CCE Bangalore vs. Kirloskar Electric Co. Ltd.- 2005 (183) ELT 334 (Tri-Bang) g) National Radio Electronics Co. Ltd. vs. CCE, Aurangabad - 1999 (105) ELT 59 (Tri) h) Uptron India Ltd., vs. CCE, Kanpur- 2001 (135) ELT 311 (Tri-Del) 4. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated and supported the impugned order and submitted that the charges on account of training the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 39;ble Apex Court in the case of PSI Data Systems Ltd. (supra) held that the charges for installation of computers and training of customer's personnel to operate and maintain it was not includable in the assessable value of the computers. Similarly, in the case of Kirloskar Electric Co Ltd., National Radio Electronics Co. Ltd., Minicomp Ltd. (supra), it has been held that the amounts collected for training are not includable in the assessable value. 6.1 The above cited judgements are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case and we hold that the charges on account of training customer's staff being purely optional has no nexus with the manufacturing and marketing of goods and therefore, not includable in the assessa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
