2016 (9) TMI 278

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ocate for the Appellant Shri Ashutosh Nath, AR for the Respondent ORDER [Order per: B. Ravichandran] 1 This appeal is against order dated 29-10-2004 of Commissioner (Appeals-II), Hyderabad. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of concrete and steel pipes liable to central excise duty. The issue involved in the present appeal is regarding inclusion of cost of transportation of these pi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... luation Rules have no application in their case. Even, if applied it has been decided in various cases by the Tribunal and High court that mere non-mentioning of freight separately in the invoice will not disentitle them for abatement of transport charges from the value for duty purposes. 3. Learned AR reiterated the findings of the lower appellate authority. He contended that the sale is complet .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on, installation and commissioning charges are not includable (point No.10 of circular No.643/34/2002-CX dated 01-07-2002". 5. Further, we find that the department filed appeal against the said original order on the ground that cost of transportation from the place of removal to the place of delivery is available provided, the same is shown separately in the invoice. Since the assessee has not sh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X