Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.26 seconds)

Cce, Raipur vs M/S Shiv Real Ispat Pvt. Ltd on 19 March, 2015

6. In view of the above clear finding, we do not find any infirmity therein. This issue is settled by the Larger Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur v. Bhaskar Ispat Pvt. Ltd. 2004 (167) ELT 189 (Tri.-LB) wherein it was held that cost of additional testing conducted at customers request and borne by the customer is not includable in the assessable value of the goods. In the case of Bhaskar Industrial Development.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 1 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Chokshi Tube Co. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Customs, Acc on 22 September, 2005

I observe that on stray occasions, the notice would pay the inspection agencies their fees and such fess would be reimbursed to the notice by their customers at a later date. I also observe that the Tribunals and Courts have consistently held that such inspection charges would not form part of the assessable value. All the case law relied upon by the Noticee in para 24 above and the case law in 2003 (153) ELT 178 (Tri-Del.) in Choksi Tube Co. Ltd. v. CCE, Ahmedabad would be applicable to them. Hence, on the ratio of the orders/decisions of this Tribunal/Courts relied upon by the notice, I hold that inspection charges as in the instant case cannot form part of the assessable value.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 0 - Cited by 4 - Full Document
1