9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1194X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 997 (2) TMI 120 - SUPREME COURT] . On perusal of the Letter of Intent/agreement placed on record by the respondent it is found that a plain reading of the various clauses of the said agreement does not lead to an inference that the same provides an enforceable right to the respondent in relation to advertisement and sales promotion by the dealers. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MYSORE VERSUS M/S TVS MOTORS COMPANY LTD. [ 2015 (12) TMI 874 - SUPREME COURT] while considering the includibility of pre-delivery inspection charges and after sales service charges interpreting the expression any amount that buyer is liable to pay to , by reason of or in connection with the sale mentioned in the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Dealers across the country. In the Letter of Intent/agreement with the dealers, it is inter alia mentioned that the advertiement and sales promotions of Motor Cars would also be undertaken by the dealers. Alleging that in view of the Circular No. 643/34/2002-CX dated 1.7.2002 and Circular No. 681/72/2002-CX dated 12.12.2002, the cost of advertisement incurred by the dealers is includible in the transaction value, periodical show-cause notices were issued to the respondent for the period from October, 1995 to Sept, 2008 for recovery of the differential duty on the revised assessable value with interest and penalty. On adjudication, the learned Commissioner dropped the proceedings. Hence, the Revenue is in appeal. 3. At the outset, the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r is includible in the assessable value of the manufactured goods. Hence, the order is bad in law and liable to be set aside. 4. Per contra, learned Advocate Shri Sachin Chitnis for the respondent has submitted that the issue is no more res integra and considered by the Tribunal pursuance to remand from the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ford India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III 2017 (6) GSTL 273 (Tri-Chennai). The said judgment was delivered following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Vs. TVS Motors Company Ltd. 2016 (331) ELT 3 (SC). Also, supporting the finding of the learned Commissioner, he has submitted that there is no clause in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upreme Court in TVS Motors Co. Ltd. s case while considering the includibility of pre-delivery inspection charges and after sales service charges interpreting the expression any amount that buyer is liable to pay to , by reason of or in connection with the sale mentioned in the definition of transaction value , observed that such charges cannot be includible in the transaction value of the goods. Their Lordships observed at para 8 and 11 as follows: - 8. What follows from the above is that where manufacturer himself does the ASS and incurs any expenditure thereon, the same is not deductible from the price charged by him from his buyer. Likewise, where the manufacturer has sold his goods to his dealer and wholesale dealer thereaft ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e essence of valuation principles had not undergone major change and the decisions delivered by this Court with regard to unamended provision on the principle of valuation were still applicable in determining the transaction value under the new provisions of Section 4 of the Act red with Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. In fact, the Order-in-Original in M/s. TVS Motors Company Ltd. or in other cases itself proceeds on that basis. 8. Also, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said judgment considered the Circulars dated 1.7.2002 and other circular issued by the Board from time to time. While accepting the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Tata Motors Ltd. Vs. Union of Ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
