Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Cce Mumbai Iii vs Ashida Electronics Pvt. Ltd on 24 March, 2011
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI
COURT NO. II
APPEAL NO. E/538, 539/06 Mum
Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. AT/594 & 595/M-III/2005 dated 21.11.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai Zone II.
For approval and signature:
Shri. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)
Shri. P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No
the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication
in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Seen
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes
authorities?
CCE Mumbai III
:
Appellant
Versus
Ashida Electronics Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent
Appearance Shri S.M. Vaidya, JDR for appellant Shri V.N. Ansurkar, Advocate For Respondent CORAM:
Shri. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Shri. P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing : 24.03.11 Date of Decision : 24.03.11 ORDER NO.
Per : Ashok Jindal This is Revenues appeals. The issue involved in the case is whether the charges recovered for erection and commissioning of SCADA system at the site of the customer and the considerations received for supply of accessories are includable in the assessable value?
2. The learned Advocate for the respondents submits that in the respondents own case, for the earlier period on the identical issue this Tribunal has held that the charges recovered from the customers are not required to be included in the assessable value vide order No. A/27 and 28/2011/EB/C-II dated 09.12.10, therefore, the Revenues appeals be dismissed.
3. Heard and considered.
4. On careful consideration of the submissions made by the respondents, we find that this Tribunal, in the respondents own case on the identical issue for the earlier period, have decided that the charges recovered for the erection and commissioning of the SCADA at the site of the customers are not required to be included in the assessable value and considerations received for the supply of accessories are also not required to be included in the assessable value. Following the same ratio we hold that in this case also the charges recovered for the erection and commissioning of the SCADA at the site of the customers are not required to be included in the assessable value and considerations received for the supply of accessories are also not required to be included in the assessable value. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity with the impugned order and the same is upheld. Appeals filed by the Revenue are rejected. (Dictated in open Court) (P.R. Chandrasekharan) Member (Technical) (Ashok Jindal) Member (Judicial) nsk 3