9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any stretch of imagination cannot be said that the same is on account of any additional consideration - issue is decided in appellant own case COMMR. OF C. EX. CUS., AURANGABAD Versus BAJAJ AUTO LTD. [2014 (7) TMI 229 - CESTAT MUMBAI], where it was held that In the absence of any flow-back from the dealer to the respondent-assessee, the question of including PDI and after-sale service charges in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has already been decided in the appellant's own case in their favour for the earlier period by this Tribunal in their own case. (i) Bajaj Auto Ltd. Vs. Central Excise, Pune-l 2000 (125) E.L.T. 755 (THbunal) (ii) Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 2005 (184) ELT 202 (TH.-Mumbai) (iii) Commn Of C. Ex. Cus., Aurangabad Vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. 2014 (300) ELT 434 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same is on account of any additional consideration. This very issue has already been decided in the appellant's favour in their own cases as cited by the Ld. Counsel. Therfore the issue is no longer res integara which also stands reinforced as per the Hon 'ble Supreme Court in the case of TVS Motors Co. Ltd. (supra). Therefore following the ratio of this Tribunal decisions in the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
