9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out transaction value for the purpose of excise duty. The extra consideration received by the appellant over and above on actual insurance charges, is required to be added in the assessable value of the finished goods - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant-assessee. - E/2638/2007 - A/61764/2016-EX[DB] - Dated:- 20-12-2016 - Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical) Sh. Sandeep Sachdeva, Charted Accountant for the Appellant Sh. V. Gupta, A.R. for the Respondent Per Ashok Jindal The appellant has filed this appeal against the impugned order wherein the extra consideration received by the appellant on account of transit insurance was to be added in the assessable value an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Explanation. For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that the price-cum-duty of the excisable goods sold by the assessee shall be the price actually paid to him for the goods sold and the money value of the additional consideration, if any, flowing directly or indirectly from the buyer to the assessee in connection with the sale of such goods, and such price-cum-duty, excluding sales tax and other taxes, if any, actually paid, shall be deemed to include the duty payable on such goods.] Section 4(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 deals with the definition for the purpose of section 4 and defines place of removal and time of removal and transaction value as under: (c) place of removal means (i) a factory or an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rding valuation of the goods cleared during disputed period for the purpose of excise duty. 11. on reading of section 4(1) reproduced above, it is evident that general rule for fixing transaction value of the goods cleared is the price charged in delivery at the time of and place of removal. This, however, is subject to the condition that the assessee and the buyer of the goods are not related and the price is the sole consideration for sale. Admittedly, in the instant case, the assessee and the buyer of the goods are not related. The question for determination is whether the price charged by the appellant from the buyer at the time of delivery at factory gate was the sole consideration for sale? To find an answer to this question, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eeded to say that even though freight cannot be a part of the assessable value that wherever freight actually paid was less than the amount collected by way of freight and transportation charges the difference was appropriated by the appellant and, therefore, the same would be a part of the assessable value. In our opinion, the Tribunal proceeded on an incorrect premise. It was clearly held in Indian Oxygen Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise 1988 (Supp.) SCC 658 , that the duty of excise is a tax on the manufacturer and not a tax on the profits made by a dealer on transportation. In view of that decision, the view taken by the Tribunal cannot be sustained. 2. Consequently, the appeals are allowed and the impugned judgment of the Tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s) were right in including the difference of transit insurance charged and the amount received by the appellant against transit insurance chare in sale price to work out transaction value for the purpose of excise duty. Thus, the impugned order cannot be faulted. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. 5. We do agree with the observations made by this Tribunal in appellant's own case for the earlier period holding that the extra consideration received by the appellant over and above on actual insurance charges, is required to be added in the assessable value of the finished goods. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity with the impugned order, the same is upheld and the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed. ( Dictated pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
