Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.56 seconds)
Ercon Composites vs Union Of India on 10 January, 2022 cites

M/S. Madhav Marbles & Granites Ltd vs Cce, Salem on 7 June, 2017

In this regard I find that the adjudicating authority has rightly decided that the place of removal in the case of export of goods is port of export as held by the Hon'ble CESTAT in the case of M/s Madhav Marbles & Granites Ltd. Vs. CCE reported in 2009 (239) ELT 120 (Trib.) and in number of other cases decided by the Tribunals. I thus do not find any infirmity in the finding of the adjudicating authority in holding that FOB value is the correct transaction value for granting rebate claim."
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 2 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

M/S. Kuntal Granites (P) Ltd Dharwad, ... vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... on 22 February, 2001

6.2 The department has also stated that the adjudicating authority has not determined the place of removal and that charges up to port has not been deducted from FOB value. Further, as per Para 3(iii) of the grounds of appeal, duty should have been paid on transaction value only. The respondent has submitted that in case of export, the place of removal is port of export where export documents are presented for clearances. This is clear from OIO No. 226-263/2011-R dt. 24.11.2011 passed by the same adjudicating authority which appears to have been accepted by the department. In this OIO, it was held that the place of removal in the case of export of goods is the place from where the goods leaves the territory of India this is the place from where the document called Export General Manifest, has been prepared and dispatched to the concern place of export that (Downloaded on 11/01/2022 at 09:10:51 PM) (5 of 6) [CW-11298/2018] may be port, airport, inland container depot, customs freight station or land customs station. Further, as per this OIO, the expenses incurred by the exporter from place of export to the place of removal are to be part of transaction value as has been provided in Section 4(3) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. In view of this, charges up to the port are not deductible and duty was correctly paid on FOB value which included all expenses from factory gate to the port of export. Reliance is also placed on decisions given by the Hon'ble Tribunal in the cases of Kuntal Granites Ltd. Vs. CCE 2007 (215) ELT 515 (Trib.)
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 5 - Cited by 29 - Full Document
1