9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 640X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at no such case has been made out therefore the argument that the transporting company is a related person and consideration realised by the transporting company for transportation should form part of the assessable value and has no legal support. Section 4 of the Central Excise Act refers to “related person” only in the context of a sale to a related person. The Revenue has not been able to prove that the partnership firm of M/s Miracle Trading Co. is a proxy with no separate entity. Neither is any case made out that part of the price of the goods is being realised by the transporting company for the benefit of the Appellant company. Therefore in the facts of the case we do not see any merit in the orders of the lower authorities and we ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods remain with the appellant till the same are delivered to the buyers. 3. Ms. Surabhi Sinha, ld. Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the issue arising out of the present dispute is squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of the appellant itself vide Order dated 18.01.2012 passed in Excise Appeal No.E/600 , 601, 603 of 2005 and Excise Appeal Nos.396 947 of 2006. 4. On the other hand, Shri R.K. Mishra, ld. AR appearing for the respondent reiterated the findings recorded in the impugned order. 5. We have heard ld. Counsels for both the sides and perused the records. 6. We find that the goods were supplied by the appellant against the Purchase Orders issued by the Electricity Board. The Purcha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t refers to related person only in the context of a sale to a related person. The Revenue has not been able to prove that the partnership firm of M/s Miracle Trading Co. is a proxy with no separate entity. Neither is any case made out that part of the price of the goods is being realised by the transporting company for the benefit of the Appellant company. Therefore in the facts of the case we do not see any merit in the orders of the lower authorities and we are in agreement with the argument of the Appellants that the proceeds realised by M/s Miracle Carrier and Trading Co. towards transportation of the goods will not form part of the assessable value of the goods cleared by Appellants. Therefore the Appeals are allowed by setting aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
