Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 16]

Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Bangalore

M/S. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. vs Cce, Bangalore on 30 April, 2001

ORDER

Shri. G.A. Brahma Deva

1. The short point to be considered in these appeals is whether collection of excels freight charges is to be included in the Assessable value. According value. According to the Department freight actually paid is less than the amount collected by way of equalized freight. Accordingly differential amount is to be included in the Assessable value.

2. Heard both sides.

3. We find that the issue herein is no longer res-integra, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Baroda Electric Meters Ltd., reported in 1947 (94) ELT 13 SC. In that case it was clearly held that differential amount not includible in the assessable value since the duty of excise is on manufacturer and not on profit made by dealer on transportation.

4. In the instant case the appellants manufacture and sells Electrical Meters to various Electricity Boards in addition to the Electronic equipment and other products for the core sectors such as Power and Industry. the price for goods is arrived at in terms of the tender process, which includes all the requisite materials and other essential recoveries. In some cases the post manufacturing charges such as Freight charges are averaged for each order to be supplied to different destinations within the particular state.

5. In the case of Baroda Electric Meters Ltd., it was clearly held that differential amount with reference to the collection of freight is not included in the Assessable value since the duty of excise is on manufacture and not on profit made by a dealer on transportation.

6. Since the issue involved herein has already been considered by the Apex Court in the aforesaid case and same has been followed by the Tribunal is a series of cases following the same, we accept the contention of the party and accordingly all these six appeals are allowed with consequential relief.

(Pronounced on 30.4.2001)