9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ally sold and hence not to be included in assessable value - E/72 & 534/2005 - 1415-1416/2007 - Dated:- 26-11-2007 - S/Shri P.C. Chacko, Member (J) and P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) [Order per : P.C. Chacko, Member (J)]. - 1. M/s. Praxair India (P) Ltd. [hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee'] are engaged in the manufacture of oxygen and nitrogen gases. They had entered into an agreement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty demanded differential duty of over Rs. 1.00 crore from the assessee. In the appeal filed by the assessee, learned Commissioner (Appeals) held that the 'MTOP' clause in the agreement was only a provision for compensation for the assessee and therefore the 'MTOP' charges received by them from M/s. KFIL would not form part of the assessable value of the goods. In the result, the demand of differe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hearing both sides and considering their submissions, we note it, in a similar case, this Tribunal has held that MTOP charges paid by the buyer to the assessee on account of the former's failure to take the minimum guaranteed quantity of the excisable goods [Oxygen Nitrogen etc.] were not additional consideration for the goods actually sold and hence not to be included in assessable value vide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) E.L.T.174 (Tri. - Del.)]. 4. In the Revenue's appeal, it is stated that the case of Inox Air Products (supra) is distinguishable. There may be factual differences, but the ratio of that decision is squarely applicable to the present case. In any case, learned SDR has not claimed that the case of M/s. Jindal Praxair Oxygen (supra) is distinguishable the present case, nor has he claime ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
