Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2018 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (12) TMI 1783 - AT - Central ExciseValuation - inclusion of transportation cost in the assessable value - place of removal - period 2004-05 - Section 4 ibid as well as Rule 5 of the Central Excise (Valuation) Rules, 2000 - HELD THAT:- Explanation 2 to the Rule 5 makes it clear that the cost of Transportation from the factory to the place of removal, where the factory is not the place of removal, shall not be excluded for the purpose of determining the value of excisable goods. To apply the above Rule, it is required to determine which is the place of removal whether it is the factory gate or the buyer’s premises. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of COMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE, AURANGABAD VERSUS M/S ROOFIT INDUSTRIES LTD. [2015 (4) TMI 857 - SUPREME COURT] where the Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered an identical question in a case where the purchase order was to transfer the property of goods to the buyer at the premises of the buyer. After carefully considering the terms of the purchase orders, it is noted that in terms of such purchase orders, the transfer of property in the goods, is taking place at the premises of the buyers and as such by virtue of Section 19 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, the sale takes place at that time. Accordingly, the place of removal is considered as the buyer’s premises under the given circumstances. Consequently, as per Explanation 2 to Rule 5 ibid, cost of transportation is to be included. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|