9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 222X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sis to the body builder. No evidence to that effect has been submitted. Further it is clear by the appellant own admission the body built vehicle is cleared from the body builder to the depot of the appellant and sold from there to the customers by the appellant. This clearly shows that there can be no sale of chassis separately to the body builder. We note that transaction value in terms of Section 4 (1) (a) cannot be arrived at based on costing figures provided by the corporate office of the appellant. Whereas the appellants claimed in the written submission before the Tribunal that they had sale of similar chassis to unrelated buyers. Now, this aspect requires verification with documents. In case the appellants were having independent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f chassis to the body builder should be considered as a sale transaction as there is a transfer of possession of the goods. He further contended that the consideration is in the form of building the body and making it fit for sale by the appellant. It was further claimed that they have sales of chassis to unrelated buyers and the transaction value as per Section 4 (1) (a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was available and as such the duty was paid on such basis only. 3. The learned AR contested the plea of the appellant and submitted that the clearance of chassis to the body builder cannot be considered as a sale. In fact the sale of fully manufactured vehicle which includes chassis happens only at the depot of the appellant. The deemed s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ill not apply if some part of production of excisable goods are cleared to independent buyers. In this connection, we may refer to the decision of the Tribunal in Ultratech Cement Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Bhavnagar reported in 2013 (295) E.L.T. 470 (Tri. Ahmd.). After detailed examination of the issue, the Tribunal relied on the Larger Bench decision in Ispat Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, Raigad reported in 2007 (209) E.L.T. 185 (Tri. LB). Reference can also be made to the decision in Steel Authority of India Ltd. vs. CCE, Raipur reported in 2016 (335) E.L.T. 91 (Tri. Del.). As such, in case the appellant is having sale of similar chassis to independent buyers then the transaction value of such chassis can be adopted for discharging Central Excise dut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
