Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.28 seconds)Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985
Section 4 in The Central Excise Act, 1944 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Tata Engineering And Locomotive Co. ... vs The Union Of India (Uoi) on 12 June, 1973
The claim of the Department was rejected relying on the decision of the Apex Court in India Automotive case referred to earlier. The Bench took the view that Department was not justified in including the value of tool kits and jack assembles in the assessable value of the vehicles manufactured by Maruti Udyog Ltd. (vide Final Order No. A/407/2000-NB dated 15.5.2000).
The Central Excise Act, 1944
Union Of India & Ors. Etc. Etc vs Bombay Tyre International Ltd. Etc. Etc on 7 October, 1983
Relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Bombay Tyre International Ltd. 1983(14) ELT 1896, Their Lordships found that manufacturers of chassis were adding cost of tool kits in the assessable value of chassis because they have contributed to the value of the chassis and not for the reason that such tool kits are used in or in relation to the manufacture of chassis. Since the chassis are marketable without the help and assistance of tool kits, the tool kits supplied at the request of the customers cannot be said to be 'inputs'. Their Lordships thereby came to the conclusion that tool kits which are bought out items supplied along with motor vehicle chassis cannot be treated as 'inputs' for the purpose of availing the benefit of Modvat credit under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules.
Bajaj Auto Ltd. vs Collector Of Central Excise on 12 October, 1994
5. A Larger Bench of this Tribunal in Bajaj Auto Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Pune went into the question as to whether hand tools, Jack assemblies or tool kits purchased by manufacturers of automobile are inputs used in relation to the manufacture of the vehicle. On the facts before this Tribunal, the manufacturer of vehicle were adding value of these articles to the assessable value of the vehicle. While clearing the vehicle along with these articles duty at the rate applicable to the vehicle on such assessable value was paid after availing Modvat credit of duty paid on them, namely, hand tool, tool kits and jack assemblies. The Larger Bench after distinguishing the decision rendered by Patna High Court on the ground that the High Court did not take note of the statutory rule under Motor Vehicles Act came to the conclusion that jack assemblies and other tools supplied along with motor vehicles are "inputs" as contemplated in Rule 57A of the Rules. Consequently, the manufacturers were found entitled to avail Modvat credit in respect of excise duty paid on such tool kits.
Amkar Engineering Works vs Superintendent Of Central Excise on 1 January, 1800
10. High Court of Gujarat in Amkar Engineering Works v. Superintendent of Central Excise 1979 ELT (J 145) examined the question as to whether Tool Box or Jack, or angle supporter or chains would form components of a Trailer. High Court took the view that these items are only in the nature of accessories and cannot be characterised as components or integral parts of a trailer. Consequently Their Lordships came to the conclusion that their value is not includable in the value of the trailer for determination of the asessable value under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act.
1